Physics can do many wonders and we heard about many of them during this conference and we'll probably be hearing about them for the rest of it. But life sciences can do even more wonders. And in case you didn't pay much attention to the developments if life sciences, there was one. And actually it happened this April. The definition of middle age has been predefined. It's actually a serious study which was done in Austria and also in Ostony Brook, so it's kind of bona fide. And 60 is now the new middle age. And the news here, the internet, you can find all these articles and some even go further as to define 40 as the new middle age. And I think for this particular instance I'm going to agree with life sciences because in this room we have a living, breathing proof that 60 is actually below the middle age. And this young gentleman here on a photograph actually taken I think somewhere around here.  Happy birthday, Borya, and happy birthday. And for those of you who would like to congratulate Borya's in his native language, that's at transliteration. Okay, so now I'm coming to the subject of this talk which I think hardly needs motivation these days. In this audience I'm talking about what will happen in a Fermiliquid with a twist. And twist is coming from spin orbit R coupling. And if you look around, spin orbit these days is everywhere. So the interactions and these are just few images to bring the memories of the R combination of these two effects. This is a work done in a collaboration with some of my students and postdocs at UF and also with Prajba. There will be plenty of Prajba Archimaltonians in this talk, but this is Prajba himself as a person and wonderful person. It is. I got interested in the subject actually while visiting Basel. I'd like to thank Danielos and members of his group for introducing me to the world of spin tronics. And also, I'm an experimentalist. We are keen to spend their time listening to some of our crazy proposals. I would like to thank Charlie Marcus who is also somewhere here. Klaus Hansen and Floran Perez for giving us their ears. And actually for a while, we were covered by the same grant with Daniel Prajba and Charlie Marcus. So part of it is coming from this work. Okay, so I'm going to address a really simple problem. It's not going to be topological. I'm going to talk mostly about simple-minded Prajba-like interaction and turn on election interaction in addition and see what happens. There are three avenues of work which has been started and are going for the time being. One of them is simply well to ask, do we have a thermo-liquid at all? What happens if we turn on the election interaction in assisting with spin orbit? Is it going to have some dramatic effects as in bringing us to a non-firm liquid? And this is not going to happen. For obvious reasons, near each of the thermo-surfaces we have well-defined aquasic particles with abnormalized masses and there is a long line of papers which tell us how to do the preservation theory in a particular basis of orbit as per its states. Then there is an issue of collective modes which I'll spend probably most of the time today and also an issue of a general structure of a thermo-liquid which I will probably talk at the very end of the talk. So this is my outline. I will talk mostly about a simple side of the theory and I will talk mostly about it because there are some predictions for the experiment. There is no clear experiment done yet. I'm not going to explain it and I have no data to show but we hope to stimulate some experiment. And then I will talk about the analogy of a thermo-liquid with not the spin orbit coupling. And while talking about a collective mode, I will be working in a pretty simple up-regime when a spin orbit is small in some sense compared to the thermo-liquid.  In the absence of the interactions, all spins are going to precess with the same frequency but phases are going to be random because there is no relation between different electrons. And what the interaction does, it locks the phases of these precessions into a collective mode. And so in more detail that's how it looks like on the energy versus the wave-number diagram. We have a spherotational invariant thermo-liquid. A lambda function is parameterized by two functions of the angle and for the purposes of this talk we'll be only just in a spin-spin part of the interaction. This function f as a function of theta between the angle of the angle between the momentum gives us the strength of the effective interaction here. There are several points on this vertical axis. If we do the usual procedure to solve the kinetic equation in the presence of the field and in the presence of the interaction, we'll find that the non-clibrium part of the distribution function can be decomposed into a set of harmonics and each of the harmonics precess with its own frequency and this frequency I in general are normalized by the interactions and this is a whole infinite set of other frequencies which start from 0 and go all the way up to a continuum. This big yellow area here is a continuum of spin-flip excitations and the endpoint of the continuum is the Zeeman energy of a quasi-partically in the magnetic field and the Zeeman energy is randomized also by the interactions. But if we look at the microscopic magnetization to which the real microscopic field can couple to, well, we need to take the distribution function multiplied by the power matrix, take a trace and integrate over the momentum and because of this integral only one l equal to 0 harmonic of the distribution function will survive. So the microscopic field can couple only l to 0 harmonic so we can forget for a while about all others and if we focus only l to 0 harmonic if I substitute l equal to 0 you see that the denominator cancels the numerator and the frequency of this mode is just 2 BB which is the normal frequency of a free electron that's thanks to the quantum theorem which tells that the skin part of the Hamiltonian commutes the betagal part of the Hamiltonian. It doesn't mean though that the interactions are completely gone because this frequency here is just the endpoint of the actual collective mode which is a dispersive mode and in the helium-3 arcane community it is known as silicon-legged mode. The stiffness of this mode is made, if you wish, of the interaction it contains the same harmonics of Landau function which were measured in the frequency and also this mode is damped by the residual interaction between a quasi-particles and the damping are coefficient also contains other interaction parameters. And as of late 60s and 70s it was big business in helium-3 and to some extent in in simple metals to extract the parameters of the chemical theory from ESR or NMR in case of helium-3 measurements of this mode and this particular plot is from a Candela group at Columbus. This is a very clever experiment when this mode was turned into a standing wave by applying the gradient of the magnetic field. All right, now thanks to Peter Fuldestock I don't really need an introduction to a project with a bit of coupling but just to set annotations I'm going to be talking about a two-dimensional system which is asymmetric up is not equal to down and because of that the Hamiltonian has an interesting term which looks like a magnetic field which acts on the electron except for this field depends on the momentum of the electron and this is the threat field it provides a twist on the spin of the electron in such a way that the spin is at plus 90 on one of the spin-split thermal surfaces and it is at minus 90 on the other one. And the relevant energy scale as long at least as we talk about spin orbit our coupling is two alpha-alpha has units of the velocity times the Fermi-Peyton number. Okay, so now we fill these bands by electrons and we let them interact and let's look at the collective modes. And so these are the carol spin waves that's how we go in this ideal thing field and from the beginning I will make a simple assumption or simplifying assumption which is that the strength after which our coupling is weak or in terms of this approximate velocity alpha it's much smaller than the Fermi velocity or which means that the typical energy scale is much smaller than the Fermi energy. Life is then simplified tremendously. I can forget about a coupling between charge at degrees of freedom such as plasma and spin at degrees of freedom which are the modes I'm going to be talking about. Spin orbit also is not going to affect the structure of the SU2 invariant Rwanda function so far this will be the second part of the talk. So what we need to do is to solve a kinetic equation which I have here in the most general term which also in principle has other right-hand side coming from a damping and residual interaction between quasi-particles. Well that's certainly too complicated. So let's first look at a simple case when the motion is uniform, appears equal to zero and also there is no damping. Then this is a simplified form of the kinetic equation and then we're looking not at modes, we're looking at resonances and they are chiral spin resonances which were started first by Schachter-Hodex and Arthinquilstein. So I'll spend just one slide on what seems to be a technical subject but it will help to understand what's going on later on. Still the problem of interaction seems to be too difficult why don't we just solve the Fermi-Gas problem? So we have three Rajba affirmions, no interactions and we want to know how the distribution function of this gas will change. Well it is convenient to switch to a basis of new Pauli matrices and those are minus sigma z, sigma dot k and the third Pauli matrix repeats at the structure of the Rajba term in the Hamiltonian. Locally in the methanol space the algebra of these Pauli matrices is the same as of the original Pauli matrices. So I apply a perturbation to the energy in my system which is the Rajba term in the Hamiltonian and as a result I have a change in distribution function which has two terms. Simply kind of shift of the chemical potential if you reach in this two-by-two space and there is a really non-equilibrium part which depends on time and on the momentum and this is a vector which is dotted into the vector of these Pauli matrices. So when I apply a time derivative it hits the vector here when I calculate the acceleration function I have a tau matrices tau x and tau y now you have to equate this equation to this one and you have a simple system two-by-two which tells you that the components of the distribution function precess the three-dimensional space the third component does not move and this is a case of circular polarization. Okay, so now when we turn on the electron-electron interaction the only change is that the change in the energy will have two parts one is still the same orbit or coupling term and the other one is the system term which tells how the changes in the distribution function feedback to the changes in energy through the Landau interaction function we spread the Landau function into harmonics to the same for the vector of distribution functions well the commutators become a little bit more difficult because now we have to be on a local electron space this is the algebra of the Pauli matrices and as you see when k is equal to k prime it goes back to the usual algebra now we need to recall that we are working to lowest order in spin orbit so we will derive the equation of motion which I will only order alpha order alpha squared is to be discarded and then the equations are similar to what we had in other three cases except for the coefficients here are polymerized by a harmonics of the Landau function and the scale set by a spin orbit is also polymerized by itself and this effect of polymerization of a spin orbit was well known before the Tchenenreich and Daniel Loss and Saraga so if you look at the vector of the distribution function it still processes in the momentum space except for because the frequencies are now different we have an elliptic rather than a circular polarization the frequency which is again the scale of a spin orbit times this combination of Landau harmonics so going back to the diagram we got also as the case of the usual spin wave mode we have an infinite set of modes starting from zero, harmonic and up now there is a change if you look at macroscopic monetization it contains now two harmonics L equal to zero and L equal to one as opposed to the case of a spin wave when it was normally L equal to zero and then we can forget about all but two if we're talking about coupling to macroscopic field and it's pretty obvious why there should be two rather than one mode because we broke this meritational symmetry in plane and out of plane are not the same so there should be at least two collective modes which corresponds to oscillations of in plane and out of plane are components of monetization we'll keep only these modes we label them for convenience as X and Z because if we look back at what is going on with monetization we actually have a linearly polarized wave along X, Y and Z and also if I make even more drastic simplification namely I will assume that my Landau function is very simple it contains only one harmonic and not addressed these are the only two frequencies which are going to provide in this limit but just for the purposes of simplicity I will keep on with this approximation what it means is that I will still have the same modes as I have in a full-fledged theory but the frequencies of this mode are not the same as in a full-fledged theory but we don't know what these Landau functions are anyway so it's not a big price to pay so what happens if we now start to look at a non- and only from case so now this is really a mode rather than a frequency each of the resonances the equation of motion takes this form of a wave equation with a massive term and it's also pretty much obvious why it should be the case we haven't broken the temporal symmetry so the equation has to be second order in time while we still have the rotational symmetry in plane so it can be only second order in position and we have the massive mode therefore we have the massive term once we choose the direction of propagation in plane we also broke the symmetry which means that the stiffnesses of this mode are going to be different so we'll have three modes one of them is going to be longitudinal one transfers in plane and the other one also transfers in plane so this is small q approximation one can really compute these coefficients but it's not very informative if we just look at the plots the stiffness as a function of the direction of the parameter while they have some form and the change sign depending on whether we're in a weak coupling limit or a strong coupling limit but if we kind of limit ourselves with what we should expect for n-type two-dimensional gas in Gallemars tonight where these parameters are more or less known well then we're here in this range of not too strong, not too weak interactions and that means that we'll have two downward modes and one upward mode if we want to study the mode in its entirety we can either solve numerically the Dyson equation or we can even abandon the Fermi-Lepid theory go to simple-minded RPA which would allow us also to work for a forward spinor with error coupling and that's how the spectrum of this mode looks like so these are the two modes which started off to be being generated at a critical to zero then they separate, hit the error continuum and the third mode which corresponds to out-of-plane oscillations is more or less similar to this to the student-alleged mode in a partially polarized Fermi-Lepid it runs, it merges with the error continuum at this moment and it is similar work on the same issue in the context of apological insulators and also in the context of cold atoms where one can produce a multi-facial approach to coupling so now, since I started with a real magnetic field let me also then I turn it off and we have a collective mode of resonances which one can think of ESR resonances in the absence of the field and so that's the effect of RASB field on a given electron with a given momentum which doesn't lead to polarization of my system so now I can go back and turn on a real field and what it does, well, let's say this field defines the x-axis in my plane it shifts the momentum along the y-direction and now what happens is that at one particular value of the field the Fermi surfaces of spin-speed band touch when they touch it means that there is no gap for single-particle excitations so the arc continuum, this blue area here hits the zero here and so the gap in the continuum disappears to the right of this point we are in a strong field regime and there is only one mode and this mode, if we go to larger and larger field we'll grow into the ceiling-legged mode with the frequency which is unapronormalized by electron-electron interactions to the left we'll have three modes and if we turn off the field then these two modes will occur less into one degenerate mode and these two frequencies are the two spin-accurial resonances what happens with this polarization? so if we start from here we have three linearly-apolarized modes once we apply the field two of these modes become elliptically polarized the one which is still along the field is linear once we hit this point we only have one mode these modes are elliptically polarized and as we go to higher and higher fields it becomes an elliptically-circular polarized so now this would be the picture of ESR but because we have a spin orbit in the system we can also do better than simple ESR which has low sensitivity and especially in systems which have only three electrons so what we can do is we can apply an asymmetric field an independent field which is a long static polarizing field and because electrons will be moving back and forth along the electric field there will be an induced polarizing field which will be perpendicular to the polarizing field and so now we'll have ESR but not in the real field coming in this electric field but in the induced polarizing field and this gives a tremendous amplification of the signal so when we're at larger fields to the right of the critical field there will be one frequency of the resonance which will be still somewhat abnormallyized by the interactions and there will be a hump due to our continuum if we're to the left of the physical field well then if we're lucky we can hit both modes because both of them are active the third one is not going to be optically active in this regime because it corresponds to auto-plane components and also a hump in our continuum so that's one of the predictions here okay so what one can do in order to measure these modes many things one can try to do and we hope that some of them will work first of all one can certainly probe this mode absorption of magnetic appropriation this is just probing the resonances at Q equal to zero the total conductivity which is a correlation function of velocity our velocity has not only the usual adruda theorem but also because the velocity couples to spin the total losses couple to spin spin susceptibility and so the mode which is a pole of the susceptibility will be seen in optical absorption so this is a cartoonish picture how the mode will look like so this is the adruda peak and this is the rajba continuum which will be seen even in the creatinine picture but also there is a collective mode which kind of excuse the continuum to probe the dispersion of the modes one can certainly think about Raman so one mode here in plane is infrared active therefore it's not Raman active but the other one will be Raman active but one can also try to implement what people in helium-3 are doing that is to form standing waves out of these spin-carrel modes and one can try to do it by producing modulation in spin orbit asplitting which can be done by imposing a large gate so that it's much larger than at the Fermi wavelength so that the motion of electrons is not quantized but the motion of spins is in this case the microscopic of motion formatization takes on a quasi-shredding return where the potential energy is being played by the position-dependent spin orbit-splitting we have these three modes and in a typical range of parameters some of them have upward dispersion so they have these particles in this quantum mechanical world and some anti-particles that have downward dispersion and that means that the pattern of absorption is sensitive to the sign of the gate wall which namely if I change this potential hump into a potential barrier it will bind one type of particles and not the other while if I have a hump it will bind particles this negative mass so to put some numbers on this picture the frequencies of this mode given some reasonable assumptions about the interaction are in the tens 30-60 gigahertz range for aluminum-gallium arsenide if we look at indian-gallium arsenide it brings us to 1 to 2 terahertz space-wise there's this limiting momentum here it gives us at a scale which can be seen in Raman is 10 to 3 in gallium arsenide or 10,000 in indian-gallium arsenide so if we look at various systems it seems that for the purposes of absorption one would need a good sample with mobility 10 to 5 two-way damping of indian-gallium arsenide EDSR gallium arsenide will probably do and resonant Raman we can listen from Floran Perez that cadmium-magnum tellerite I think went well off should do work so this is the second part of the talk which is probably going to be one slide so let me tell you what it's all about so the purpose now is to abandon a dissection of the spinner with a coupling and to ask how a spinner with a coupling actually modifies Landau interaction function the same innovation asked about a partially spin-polarized Fermi liquid which was back in 1958 but there is a change in the story because we have no real field we have two quasi-particles with a de-momentum each of them is in the field of Rajbo which is associated with its own momentum but also one can do more things with this field because the cross-product of two Rajbo fields is not zero and it's out of the plane and that breaks the spin-rotational invariance so if you go through the symmetry consideration you end up with a very long Landau function all this invariance time reversal, permutation and see infinity to be symmetry one can check in the interpretation theory if it works yes it does one can play many things in the charge sector derive optimization of the effective mass incompressibility etc etc and as you would expect this is more toys and whistles you have intra-band matrix elements intra-band matrix elements and this is maybe useful but the stumbling point comes when we think about spin-sectability which is not a Fermi surface property even in a Fermi gas of Rajbo fermions what it means is that when we try to construct a Fermi liquid theory the changes in energy and the and the activation numbers are necessarily off-diagonal and the equation which is supposed to relate the g-factor of a Fermi liquid to the g-factor of a Fermi gas has an integral part which is integral over the space in between two Fermi surfaces now when the Fermi when spin orbit accompanying is weak is a problem that's a narrow interval when it's large spin orbit we have a region in between where our quasi-particles are not defined and what it means is that we cannot formulate spin-sectability in terms of few Landau parameters which are projected onto the Fermi surface so that's kind of a frustration which we still don't know how to recomb and there is a similar study of Fermi liquid on the helical surface of the state of the dimensional archeological insulator which ran into the same stumble but because of the difference of this system they seem to have found a way around this and with that I would like to thank you for your attention and I'll finish


Right now you have some beliefs about what you see, where I am, even how what you see is caused. You have some beliefs about the nature of this thing, about how it came about. You have some beliefs about who you are and what you're doing. None of that is known immediately.  Most of what you believe, most of what you think you know or do know, is gathered through inference. Inference is this practice or this study of taking what you already know and inferring some further truth, some further belief. You do not immediately know where I am, you are taking the evidence of what you see and what you hear and maybe even what you've seen before in formats similar to this to draw an inference about what this is, where I am and what's around me. None of you are present here and even if you were present here you would still have to make an inference about where you are, what I'm doing, what's going on in order to have knowledge about this situation. So inference is this practice, this ability, this study, however you want to call it, of being able to take what you already believe to be true or what's better known and draw a further belief, some further knowledge from what's already known. That further piece of knowledge is not immediate. You have to draw an inference. You have to draw an inference. Logic is the study of inference. And in this course we're going to study pretty much one main kind and very, very small part of one main kind of inference. So logic is the study of inference. And as I said we're going to take a look at only one kind of inference and a small part of that. The kind of inference we're going to look at is deductive inference. We're going to evaluate arguments in terms of whether they are deductively valid. Deductive validity means that if the premises are true or the reasons that you have for the conclusion, if the premises are true, then the conclusion must be true. Or another way of saying this is the truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. The truth of the premises guarantees the truth of the conclusion. This is contrasted to inductive inference. Inductive inference means that the truth of the premises makes the conclusion more likely to be true, but it's not guaranteed. Now it's not to say that inductive inference is bad. I'm not saying it's bad. You have to use a lot of inductive inference for the rest of your life, the totality of your life. But you also use deductive inference and that's what we're going to study in this course. There's lots and lots of different kinds of deductive inference. And I don't want to scare you by starting listing them off or even even just necessarily just, you know, dive right into what we're going to deal with. But instead I want to kind of introduce it in pieces. So we're going to study in this course, we're going to look at propositions, propositional arguments, hence propositional logic. Now what this means is we got three main things, three main topics we're going to study within deductive logic. First are terms. Second is propositions. And third are the arguments themselves. So the terms. Terms are not just words. We use words all the time, but words don't really do much without meaning. Terms is that meaning that we have for these words. Specifically we're going to try to, you know, pay attention to the fact that you need one and only one meaning for a word. If you start having multiple meanings for a word, well then you're going to confuse things. And that's actually multiple terms for one word, which can be bad. So, you know, even for instance tree, right, use tree to refer to this organism right here, or even how you might chart out your family lineage, or even how you might start trying to graph out different sorts of decisions. And we use the word tree for all three of those. But in terms of, we're dealing with a term. If we're going to use term in an argument, we're going to stick with one meaning. So, we got terms. Let's take a look at propositions. Well, you can't make an argument out of terms alone. Terms combine. They combine to form propositions. Propositions are what are true or false. So, there's a stream behind me. That's a proposition. That has terms, stream and behind me. Propositions, at least the smallest proposition, is composed of a subject and a predicate. And a proposition is true just in case the subject is what's described, predicate is what's describing. And a proposition is true, an atomic proposition is true, just in case the subject is accurately described by the predicate. We're also going to have complex propositions, and this is where atomic propositions are connected with a logical connective. And a logical connective is a phrase or word that indicates a relationship between the atomic propositions or something about the truth value of both propositions. These complex propositions, and we're going to look at a lot of these, are themselves true or false. And whether the complex propositions are true or false depends upon whether the atomic propositions are true or false and the nature of their connection. Now, believe it or not, we're not going to spend a lot of time figuring out whether propositions are true or false. That's probably a whole different endeavor. There's all kinds of propositions that you're going to investigate through the course of your studies. And they're all going to use logic, hopefully. They're all going to use logic. And these different areas of studies will investigate whether these various propositions are true or false, but logic is merely interested in the study of that action, of that study, of that inference. Logic is the study of inference. It tries to answer the question, what makes a good entrance? So we're not going to spend a lot of time investigating about whether the stream was behind me. We're not going to spend a lot of time investigating what, you know, if you are who you think you are, whether 2 plus 2 equals 4, anything like that, rather we're going to look at at least some of the ways that you try to reach those propositions, try to infer those propositions through inference. So we got terms. Terms are meanings, right? And definitions are the define or don't define a term. We got propositions. Propositions are what are true or false. Okay. We still don't yet have arguments. That's next. So far, we haven't even gotten to the main object of the study of logic, right? Logic is the study of inference. What makes a good inference? Its main object is an argument. Now, arguments, so far what we looked at, it's not arguments. We've looked at terms. Terms either define or do not define. Terms are not arguments. Terms compose propositions. Propositions are what are true or false. And you might think, well, propositions, hey, that's what we're doing with arguments. No, propositions compose arguments. Like I said, the bulk of our time will not be studying whether propositions are true or false. Just merely what follows from the true or error of propositions. So propositions compose arguments. Not just any set of propositions will do. And not all propositions are created equal in an argument. So a, like I said, an argument is composed of propositions. It's composed of premises and a conclusion. Premises are what infer the conclusion. Premises are what's doing the inferring is another way of saying it. Conclusion is what's inferred by the premises. Our conclusion is what is inferred. Now, premises and conclusions, well, these had better be propositions. And these can either be true or false. But what makes them a premise versus a conclusion is not whether they're true or false.  The best if your premises were true. But this still doesn't, we're not going to investigate whether an argument is a good argument by just looking at whether the premises are true and the conclusion is true. That doesn't tell us whether an argument is a good argument. What tells us whether it's a good argument is the relationship between the premises to the conclusion. Okay. Now, a quick word about this. Premises should be better known than the conclusion. Premises should be better believed than the conclusion. At the very least, it should be more probable than the conclusion. Remember, the point of inference is to extend our knowledge to go from what we already know to what we don't yet know. And logic helps us do this. Logic helps us do this. So if you're reading a passage and you're trying to figure out what the conclusion is, well, one big clue is what's better known. Which sentences are better known or which propositions are better known than the other one.  Although most frequently conclusions can be the last sentence or the first sentence of a passage, not always. Sometimes the conclusion isn't even stated. When you look at some arguments, the conclusion is not stated and frustratingly. So what some arguments, premises are not even stated. You're going to have to learn how to figure out the difference between the premises and the conclusion, to figure out whether the conclusion is missing or whether any of the premises are missing. That's a skill you're going to have to develop because not everybody out there is a trained logician. And even some trained logicians, frankly, leave stuff out. So when we're looking at arguments, what you should be looking for is the difference between the premises and the conclusion and the relationship from the premises to the conclusion. And that's how we're going to investigate. That's how we're going to evaluate arguments.


In this video, we will show you how to access Clever through the Student Learning Commons. Clever is a platform that allows students to access many digital and online programs through one single sign-on. To get started, access the Ory County Schools website at www.orycountyschools.net. From here, you can click on the puzzle piece located right below our header. This will take you to Clever's login page. Click Login with Active Directory. Next, you will type in your username and password. Your username will be your first and last name, and your password will be a unique 8-digit passcode given to you by your teacher. If you do not have this or cannot remember this, please reach out to your teacher to get access. Once you have entered this information and you hit sign in, you will then come to a Clever dashboard page. Here, you will have specific pages for your teachers as well as a list of other tools to choose from. Please note, these tools will look different depending on your level. If you have any additional questions on how to access Clever or use this platform, please reach out to a teacher or someone at the Ory County Schools help desk.


So look, if you liked today's video, give it a thumbs up, consider subscribing. Maybe talk about his time sensitive. Now, if you want to stick around, I know I got a bunch of questions in the comments section. I'll answer all those questions, the best of abilities and we'll go from there. But if not, thanks for stopping by, I appreciate it. Now let's get to the fun stuff, honestly.  Paul, when is that going to happen? Is that Monday or Tuesday? Hold on, let me check my calendar. Tuesday, 4 p.m. my time, I don't know what your time on. So that's going to be good times, so we'll go up. Maybe we'll talk about the snack that I purchased or the Mincewap Dexes that I used to purchase that and talk about Cardano and stuff, which some people despise and some people absolutely love. It's amazing to me. Good to see you, good to see you. That is good. A couple of things that helped me out was rest, not working out, red wine, acupuncture, chiropractor, who actually knows what he's doing. You can go to chiropractors for herniated discs and they will destroy you or you can go to some that actually have said I've had a herniated disc, I know what we're going to do. And then the correct physiotherapist and also to reduce your stress as much as possible to reduce the amount of cytokines that are released because it's an inflammatory response. And then also what helped I think a lot was the fasting. I actually fasted it for four days to allow what's called apoptosis or phagocytosis where the body pretty much just eats away at any kind of invaders and it's a process. So yeah, that all talks about it. No one cares about that, really. But thank you for asking. Most people care for the crypto. I think today I'm actually going to go to the beach, it's a nice day. Take the dog down, take a walk, go see the people playing volleyball, show them I'm still alive, chill rainbows as Queen Lodger makes it easy. Yes it does. And I just started that portfolio tracker. So they allowed me and a couple of different people to be the beta testers. So once it, it should be ready, it should be ready by the end of the year which we're already like two, three weeks away if not January. I think that's the time when I think everybody's going to use it. But it's free, it's great. I like free. Ah, let's see here. Rusty Bot, anyone else got a phantom wallet? Why is it not more apps inside? I've got a phantom wallet and it's, I gotta tell you, it's pretty great. I'm not a big fan of keeping things in a hot wallet essentially. But when you're using the Solana Dexes like Orca and Jupiter, it comes in super handy. And super fast. And of course there's another aspect of this which you can't see. But when you're using a, I wanna try something real quick. Let's see. When you're using the wallet, within the wallet, let's try this. Yeah, great. When you're using the wallet itself, you don't even need to go to a Dex. You can just swap it in the wallet. So people were asking and I didn't, I missed an opportunity to let people know. Within the wallet, if you have Solana, which is what you're gonna use and you wanna buy Bonk, again, I know people aren't sick of that, or Guac or Pith or Pyth, you can just swap it right there. And it's super fast and super easy. That's it. Crypto Hunky, I thought I'd turn the super stickers off but thank you. I appreciate it, I really do. I would request everybody to not do the super stickers. Just save your money and buy crypto. But if you wanna give me some, hey, I'll take it. Hunky's probably loaded, so I appreciate it. Red Panda Pie, coffee croissant, send them thumbs up. Can't beat that, that is it. And it's beautiful here in Guainado. I know we're getting closer to a bull run because the amount of people that are asking me about Puerto Rico, that shot up exponentially. So that's it. What can I say about Puerto Rico? It's great. If you like perfect weather, I guess, beaches, ocean. And if you like bland food, sorry, Puerto Ricans, that's my only gripe. And I know people will say, but Robby gotta go here and here, I know. I gotta go other places. And it's great. I mean, it just really is. And we'll probably be here the rest of our lives. That's it. Only I would recommend if you do move here, there is a problem with the electrical infrastructure. Get solar panels if you can grab them. Because, and then just talk to me, I got a great guy. And it's seamless, it's flawless, it's great. And because there's so much sun here, it works consistently. Yes, exactly. Are you aware of Flare and Songbird? Wasn't that a drop for XRP long time ago? I know people talked about that was, I think, the smart contract functionality, right? I have some. And some people say it's gonna be awesome. And here's what I say to every project now. I don't even question it. I'm just like, whatever it is, it's probably gonna be pretty good, honestly. Because in this age that we're at, we're in this bull run. Now we could have a massive pullback. I'm hoping for it. But pretty much anything that you get into is gonna go up. This doesn't take a lot of brain power, which is good for me.  Everybody got it right. And everybody's gonna call the top perfectly. So just be aware they're out there. Ha! When is the hyper AI box show? Jerry just texts me right now as a matter of fact. And we'll be doing this, I think tomorrow. So maybe we'll do that, that node setup. If you don't know it's a hyper AI or hyper cycle is an AI play that Jerry got me into. So we'll see how it works out. Have you looked at ICP doc one? It's great. That's a great picture. Yeah, I own some internet computer protocol. I mean, that's the one that, and if you've ever taken a look or heard the real stories behind the scenes with that one, you know, SPF and FTX, they played pretty dirty. And I'm glad they got what came to them. And I'm glad CZ Binance did what he did.  But they wanted Solana and their DEXs and their products to work. They didn't want an ICP to work. So they fretted it to the ground and they said it was awful and they convinced a lot of their, this is the stories that I hear to get out of it. And I think it was just ahead of its time. And if you look at, you wanna look at the charts or just at the price action, I'm a big chart guy, to Tom Crown, he's way better at this. CTO Larson, hey, ICP is the top 40, look at that. Which also I'll be on Tom's show, I think Monday. Tom Crown, it's up 4%, hey? 30 days is up 38%, one year 26. But I just wanna show you, like again, this might be a good play. This is why I looked at it. Cause I'm like, you know, if we max out, look at, look at this, it was $461 at the top. Even it goes to 164. I'll take 164 for at five bucks. You better believe it. So yeah, I bought a decent amount. So yeah, I've looked at it. Have you ever got a text? I thought it was Jerry, but it was actually Mick Jagger's ex, yeah, never. Because Jerry's big bald head always pops up on the text messages and I'm like, that's not Jerry Hall. That's Jerry V Hall. Let's see, Guac Ancelona, I own some. Oh, Ricky, yes, Miller Lite and Coors sometimes. But I got into red wine because the acupuncturist said, you should really drink red wine because it's helpful with Reservatol, I would say it wrong, and it helps increase circulation. And sure, yeah, but I gotta tell you though, when I was in Germany, best beers of all time. Architect Jeff says, do you ever look at past market cap to determine new all-time hard targets? That's why I did the last run. I actually just did fractals and said, well, this did 10X, so on this next run, we could see a 15 or 20X, and some it worked out and some it didn't, I actually did pretty good on. I did great on Theta and Cardano, but didn't do good on Bitcoin. I thought Bitcoin's gonna 150K, missed that one. And then I revised it to 100K, didn't even make that. So yeah, Ethereum, I thought we'd go to 10K, I think it barely, I don't know, I thought we'd go to 10K, I think it barely, didn't even touch 5K. So, no, what I do, and there's a link in the description, it's just much easier, watch this video right here, just to do indicators, because everything follows Bitcoin, right? Everything pumps into Bitcoin, then it flows into medium caps, alts, and then small cap alts, then back into Bitcoin. But when Bitcoin starts to collapse first, or hits its peak, there are indicators. You can take a look at the PyCycle top, the MVRBZ score, the P oil multiple, and a couple of other different ones, and you can see that it'll give you that point. Now, am I gonna hit the top? Nope, if I get to at least 60% of the top, I'll be extremely happy. And that's what, that's all I can hope for. Dubbski says, what are the Solano plays looking into? Watch the video from yesterday, specifically around the 14 minute mark, and I talk about the five, like five or six different Solano plays that are out there that you can get into, which you could potentially get a pretty big airdrop. Those are the ones. Crypto on the beer market. Panda, I just noticed that you got the Christmas, the Santa Claus hat on, it's very nice. Very nice. Yeah, it's not a very bullish thing. No, I don't really drink that much beer anymore. It's just, it was good in the army days, but that's it. Yeah, what a title, Crook almost made it. This is what it is. Look, you can learn a lot from failure, and you can learn a lot from the Crooks. I think that's the people we should really be looking at into. There's a reason why people talk about Bernie Madoff consistently, because we can learn a lot from him and what to watch out for. There's a lot of things that we can look at for the collapses that just happened. And if it wasn't for those collapses, and if we just would have kept going on, I think Sam, doing what he did, it would have collapsed everything moving forward. But I will say, the last of these rules, I think these rules, these rules are gonna save me. I don't know what's gonna do for you. But the rules are, you know, don't invest money, you can afford to lose. Everything's a scam, it's a help here otherwise. Now that one has helped a lot of people, because people have been, they email me or DM me or tag me on Twitter and say, hey, I almost did this, but I thought it was a scam and it sure was. And that doesn't matter how much you make, it's how much you keep and scammers will get you. Don't leave anything on exchanges. I think that's helped some people's time's gone on. Don't use leverage and take profits on the way. I think take profits is a big thing, because when I got into 2017, it was almost sacrilegious to say that you were gonna take profits. Especially when you said, I'm gonna sell Bitcoin. When you said you're gonna sell Bitcoin, everybody came out against you. How can you do that? You're never supposed to sell Bitcoin. And I'm like, how am I, you know, if you wanna keep it, that's fine, but your goals are not my goals. That's it. Am I gonna sell all my Bitcoin? No, but what am I gonna do?  It's just to me, I just, I see it as like gold. People, I see Bitcoin like gold 2.0, just a much superior version of it. But at some point you're gonna have to utilize that. I mean, what's the case? Just sit on high on top of a mountain with all your Bitcoin and cold storage and be homeless. I don't know. Darren says, are we still desing daily weekly the same nine to 10 projects? Pretty much. I mean, except like when we started the one in September, I think I was desing Algo at that time. At that time, and I just kind of stopped because I wasn't really doing too much. I've been doing it for quite some time. Now it just took off recently, which is great because it didn't do anything when I was desing, which is exactly what you wanted to do. I don't want it to do anything as I'm accumulating. I want it to stay there or go down from dollar cost averaging. That's it. And I did a great job. Algorand did a great job of doing absolutely nothing until I needed it to. So yeah. And then the rest of them, let's see. Where did the, let me pull it up. Remember everybody, so within the cryptoverse, this tool that I'm using is free. You just have to sign up with your name and email. That's it. But if you want to do more things, there's a paid tier. There's different tiers. And right now he's having a sale I think till December. I'll tell you about Christmas. So let's see, what was I? So Bitcoin, yeah, Ethereum, yeah, Solana, yeah. Aida, yeah. Oh, and Aida's been doing great. Hasn't done anything except this week. Something like this is fantastic. Dogecoin did some more things. I was kind of hoping it would be dead for a while. Polkadot's doing well. Chainlink I was doing. Polygon, yeah. All these ones. And there's some other ones that I've, I kind of like value cost average those crazy ones. Like Pyth or Pith and Bonk and Snack and crazy stuff like that. But those are like gamble plays. It's okay to gamble. Just don't do it every single day and you know, put all your money into it. It doesn't make any sense. Tachwan says, I'm a, I bought the very bottom of Aida. I'm a genius by accident. That's all it doesn't matter how you did it. You did it. Ah, yeah. Algo es algo, viejo el diablo. That's right. That's the phrase. Something is something. Says the devil. Yeah. Let's say the like button. I don't know about that one. Rusty. And the fans of all I swapped some soul in the USDC when I did the wallet value went down. Firstly, I lost some money when I swapped back and the wallet value is back normal. I will say this though, there was an issue today with the Tangem app and you had to actually update the app itself. So just make sure that there's no updates that need to be done and be careful with it because like I know a lot of people who have updated because it's a browser based wallet. So just be careful. Go to the official website first and then click on the link where it says to download and see if there's actually something that actually can be downloaded and done because some people do it and they get a fake one and they lose all their crypto. That's the problem with crypto. You gotta be so careful. One wrong move and that's it. You lose everything. Really? Arbitrum is a huge unlock in March, 2023. Let's take a look. Let's see. There, perfect. There's a website called token unlocks. It's token.unlocks.app and it's free. Let's see. Well, it's got 87% of the circulings apply out. Upcoming event is in 97 days. So it's a cliff unlock. Let me see this. March 16, 2024, yeah. So they're gonna get 673 million. It's a lot, which is worth 788 million. Am I looking at that right? Let me see here. Let's go on here. So it goes from roughly 1.494, there's a bunch. 2.6, yeah, that's a bunch, right? And who gets it? 3.4, ooh, the investors, 438 billion, 250 million and Team Futures, wow. That's gonna be not a good day to be in Arbitrum. I'm gonna guess, unless we are, but here's the thing though. Nah, nah, nah, that's probably not a good day to be in it. Let's just be honest. Because even if you're an investor, look at the cliff. You had to wait for how long? I had to wait, I mean, at least over a year, right? Because let's see, what was the start point? Yeah, it's been a year. March 25, 2023 to then to March 2024. You better believe they're gonna take profits. So, just depends. I gotta tell you though, Arbitrum has been a very big laggard. It hasn't really done much at all. I'm very disappointed in that project. Not what it's doing, it looks to be doing pretty some great thing, it's ranking the top 50, not bad. But look at this, seven days, 5.7, 14, 10.2, 5.9, max out, $1.68, it's just stagnant. It's weird though, because if you look at like the TVL, and take a look at the chains, look at this.  And then Arbitrum's fourth, at 4.79. The next one is ton, then Solana, then Avalanche, then Polygon. Just people use it, it's just, I don't think people really wanna invest into it. I mean, to make that price action go. So, not for sure, maybe it's one of those things where he who rips last rips best, will find out. I'm not gonna sell it until I make a pretty good profit. That's my plan. And sometimes that works, sometimes it won't. Andreas says, yeah, the bright side is most unlocked. Yeah, in your opinion, which layer one is most potential to go in the next build? All the L1s have the most potential. Doesn't make any sense. But I'm not gonna, I don't really like to say those because then everybody gets hurt when I don't say they're L1. But Rob, what about this and this? I don't know. I can say this, they're all gonna do well and I want mine to do the best, I'm honest. So, I don't, I'm curious to see if Ethereum's gonna grow like everybody thinks is gonna do, because it's really slowed down. Really interested to see what's gonna be in the top five at the end of 2024. Slalom makes a pretty big compelling case. And then you've got one of my favorites, Nier. It's kind of underperforming a little bit, but did a pretty good job. Avax is going to be huge just because of gaming alone. A lot of these different gaming platforms have chosen Avax for a particular reason because it works pretty damn well. And it actually fits their needs. Cause I gotta tell you, we're going through this process for a project that we're working on. And a lot of these, especially the wallets, either they're just straight up lying or they're not telling the truth. Because when we like put it at the paces about, they say, well, we can do this, we can do that. And we go through it, you can't do the things. Especially like throughput. Like you guys can't do what you're saying to do. Like I don't do it, the CRCTO does it. But I'm like, I don't know, man. Ah, adios. Ooh, Celestia. November, 2024 and like, ah, so you got a lot of time.  Yeah, it's happening right now. It's happening right now. There's no reason why these meme coins should go up as much. There's no reason. And I don't remember. I mean, Pepecoin went up exponentially a while back. And that was just kind of like one of those like, that was during when we were kind of coming out of the bear market. So just didn't make much sense. So that one was an interesting play, but it seemed like now everything pumps. Everything pumps. So I think right now, I don't care what you're doing. I think you're gonna do pretty well just throwing money into it. And that's it. Hey, walking with pause. Got on the pause. Yeah, Ricky said the best. I gotta go too. Time to get out of here. Everybody, thanks for watching. I appreciate it. On your way out, do me a favor. Cause you hit that like, and then also comment for the algorithm. That's always great. That's it for today. And then tomorrow will be the guest, Jerry Hall. That'll be on Tom Crown show next week and also Cardano with Paul. So I'm looking forward to that. But everybody, thanks so much. And I will see you on the next one. Have a great.


and William Kennedy of Bloomberg News. They'll be covering all the issues that Director General Grossi and the IEA is currently facing in the world. So please have a seat and welcome them. William, I turn it over to you. Thank you very much, Jeff. Well, it's my great pleasure to be here at the opening morning of the Atomsburg Millennium. And it's my great pleasure to be able to have a chat with your Director General, Mr. Mathael Grossi. Thank you for joining me today and giving me the opportunity. Thank you very much. Great pleasure. Obviously, the main theme here is the interplay between nuclear and climate change and the energy transition. Let's start there. On the surface, nuclear should be the magic bullet. It's baseload, it's low carbon, but it's not quite happening. In many countries, we're closing more plants and we're opening. China is an exception. But in other places, we're not seeing the nuclear in a sense that you might expect. Why do you think that's happening? Well, yes. Well, thank you very much. I think there is a combination of factors. Some are technology driven, some are financially driven, some are societally or politically driven. And I think it's a combination of those. What we think is that what's important is the sector. And when I talk about the nuclear sector, I include in this concept every participant. The industry that has always been there, of course, national authorities, the regulators. Perhaps the one that was a bit less visible was the IAEA, paradoxically, in the past, taking a more, if not neutral, distant approach to it. So what we see happening is that nuclear is facing the need to catch up with a different configuration of factors. The last nuclear boom in the 70s was taking place against the backdrop of a different economic situation with a lot of state-pushed investment and other circumstances that are no longer there. Then the sector had to undergo challenges like Chernobyl in the 1980s, almost in the 1990s, and in the mid-2000s Fukushima, which were affecting and we should not deny it. We at the IAEA like to talk about these things, discuss them openly, promote a scientific debate about those. But we're affecting a number of political decisions that were taking in a number of places. This has been moving and I think that what we see today is a configuration of factors like never before. But still, and I think your initial question applies. You were saying we are not seeing it as we could be seeing it today. Are we going to see it in the future? Well, I think this will not fall off its own weight. There is no fatality in economy. There is no fatality in the sense of something that is inevitable in the energy sector. So there are a number of facilitations that can be exercised. This is what we are trying to do. We have been looking at what has been happening. For example, we see there is this deficit in terms of industry harmonisation and standardisation and regulatory harmonisation. So when we see this, we decided to talk to everybody and to look at it and see what can be done. Are we going to be able to agree on a number of common principles and guidelines? I really hope so. It's not automatic. Then the political debate. And I think here on the political debate, the convergence of the climate change, I mean what this whole thing here in Charm is all about and the energy crisis are combining. But mind you, when we talk about COPs and we talk about the climate debate, this has been happening for some time and still the voice of nuclear was not being heard. So we are trying to modify that. What we do here together is an expression of that. We want to be open to a discussion where we look at the weak points, at the strong points, and most of all at the possibilities which are huge. Let me say that we do not see nuclear as a magic wand that is going to be solving the whole range of issues and problems that we have. But we also recognize that without it, everything else will be extremely complicated. So it's an approach which is open, which tries to, with lucidity, recognize what the problems are and in as much as we can address them. The problem that we have is that if I commission a nuclear power plant today, it's probably going to take more than 15 years before it produces. So how do we shorten that length of time? Because it's 2022, we're urgently trying to meet targets at 2030, 2050. A nuclear power plant in 2037 is a help but help today. Can there be anything that you can do to speed that time up? Yes, this has frequently been mentioned as one of the main problems. I think here we will also need to fine tune a little bit the message when we look at the real times and when you have an average. Of course you may have cases of overruns, tremendously long times, and others that are not so. So when you look at the curve and when you look at the average, you will see it more towards seven years than 15. You had cases with 15 which were related to a number of managerial and licensing issues that we have seen. But that should not invalidate, in my opinion, the case for nuclear, in the past, and going back to the 1970s example, has been able to be on the market on significantly shorter time spans. So that can happen. But again, you were saying what can be done? Well, I was slightly or laterally addressing some of that when I was talking about these issues of harmonization and standardization. I think there is a need, there is a real need to look at the regulatory approaches in a different way. The business model is changing. We are moving towards a much more globalized effort than in the past, let alone not to talk about modularity and new nuclear with small and modular reactors. So we firmly believe that the timing issue is one that is by no means insurmountable. We believe that there are already now, we are seeing now projects that are moving at a much faster scale. We saw the case of the UAE, for example, which achieved the double feet of being a newcomer and becoming a newcomer that was able to, in the space of seven years or so, have these nuclear power plants operating, are going to be putting the nuclear factor at 25% of the electricity produced in that country. So it is by no means impossible. And one more thing related to that, which your question may encapsulate. We often hear that some people say when we talk about climate and the climate change problem that nuclear is too slow, how can you say that nuclear is going to be part of the solution if we need a number x number of years to have a nuclear reactor? Well, first of all, as I said, we can be on the market much, much faster. And secondly, the problem we have is a problem that is being seen as something that needs to be solved in spaces of time that go to 2040, 2050, 2060, 2070. So how is it that when you are offering a product that is going to bring your emissions dramatically down in six or seven years, people would say that this is useless. So frankly speaking, I think there is still a lot of politics behind this. But still, the issue here is to provide the answers and I think it is up to the sector, it is up to the nuclear community to be at the top of its game as well. One country that has succeeded in building a lot of reactors very fast is China. I've been able to build 150 reactors. From your perspective, thinking about how to regulate the reactors, how to keep them safe, how to manage the fuel cycle, what can the industry learn from it? Well, I think in this case the Chinese model is different in terms of the capitalism model that you have applied in China which facilitates to a great extent the financial challenge that you may see in other parts of the world. So this is one thing, but at the same time there is a very dynamic industrial sector that has, I must say, that has been working in the safety area with a lot of dynamism. Sometimes people, I say this, it's interesting that you bring up this issue because some people say, well, that is this safety, etc. And we are working very, very well with them. And they chose to work very closely with the IEA. I think rightly understanding that given other considerations that might be brought when you talk about China is that it was in their interest to work very, very closely with the IEA and follow very closely the recommendations and the guidance that the agency is there to prove. As Director-General, I have promoted, I must also say, a very intense through different platforms dialogue with industry where we, and I can tell you where we sit together, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Americans, Koreans, French, Germans, all, all who thinks, all who are Emiratis, who are very actively pushing the sector so we can have frank open discussions of the problems that the sector is facing and the challenges it is facing. One deficit may be also that the sector may have had in the past is this lack of platforms for an open dialogue and facing the problems which does not affect the competition or industrial commercial property rights and things like that. But there is a huge amount of space for convergence and for common approaches at the same time, I believe. A lot of people are talking about the potential of small modular reactors as a climate solution, as a scalable solution that we can repeat in different countries around the world. I have a few questions about that, but let me start with do you view SMRs as an important part of the nuclear industry's future and the climate change solution? Well, it is. It is. At the same time, we have to put things in the right perspective. For some people, including those who may have had a skeptical approach to nuclear, may say, well, okay, these old nuclear we don't like, but these small reactors, maybe they are nicer, maybe they are safer, maybe we can tolerate them. Well, I'm sorry, but it sounds nice, but it's not the right approach. What we have to see is the options we have, the technology we have, the viability of each and every segment of nuclear. So, first of all, you have the global fleet. The global fleet is big. And rightly so. There is nothing wrong about that. You have countries that are geared and are based on fleets that are this type of big reactors. And here you are looking at fleet replacement, like the United States. For example, some new bill, but basically that to a greater extent that in Canada as well or in France, in the United Kingdom. So in these countries, you will see more of these reactors or you will see them extending their lives, which is another important topic that I believe very relevant in terms of climate change. But so this is one part and nuclear innovation is also looking at that because those reactors are also evolving. So big can be good as well. This is very important. And then you have the modularity and the small reactors. Small reactors are of course immensely promising from a variety of perspectives. The one here more in my office is the one from developing countries because they feel they see a possibility there. When you talk about nuclear for many economies, this looks as the impossible thing that you look from outside, knowing that you are never going to be able to sustain it in your economy. But when you are looking, when you are seeing the kind of products that are being developed and the possibilities that are there, well they all of a sudden become something which might be realistic. We see this and for us the IEA is I would say a big part of our work because we have to help these countries catch up in terms of capacities, in terms of the regulatory abilities and talent and structures that they need to have to be very honest. Then there is also the issue of the SMRs in big economies which is also a different kind of model but which will follow more I would say orthodox or normal processes in terms of the economic financial challenges that they may have. And finally the SMR is also an area where we will see who at the end delivers in the best tradition of scientific advancement and competition. The IEA of course being the global nuclear institution we have all of them cataloged and somebody was saying here earlier today it's around 80, are we going to see 80 different SMRs? No, maybe we will see eight if at all. But there is the issue, who is really into it, who is putting the resources behind it? We have very interesting situations in the United States with pre-licensing levels. We also see it in the UK with Rolls-Royce, we also see it in France where after some time where they were more skeptical about that now with New World they are moving very, very fast. I was visiting and could touch and see and get into an SMR in Argentina where the Karen is quite impressive to see and it's there. So the SMR is going to deliver. I think we need to at the same time I'm telling the SMR entrepreneurs you have to deliver, we have to hit the market within the next three or four years because the opportunity is clearly there. Of course if we do deploy SMRs that means many more reactors in many new countries and part of your job is to keep on top of keeping them safe, radiating the fuel. It presents huge challenges doesn't it potentially? Well, very good point. The other day you know in the IEA we're always having conferences about so many things and we had a big one on safeguards. You know the safeguards are the inspections that we do all over the planet and some were saying well are you going to be able to cope with the challenge of having all of a sudden you know dozens of new reactors out there. The answer is yes. The answer is yes. Our inspectorate is ready to do that at the same time when it comes to modularity these reactors have features about them that make them very easy to approach with the right safeguards approaches and one very interesting thing is that unlike in the past we are working with designers at the level of design based safeguards which is a long and complicated label to say that we inspectors come to them and we work together to make it possible for our inspectors to check faster because you know the operator sometimes you know is a bit annoyed by the inspection work and we have to make it easy for them not you know interrupting their job. So I would say modularity is not a challenge in that regard. Let me come back to the point you made about aging reactors. Like me a lot of those reactors built in the 1970s were approaching their 50th year. That's half a century. If we keep them going you're going to have reactors 60, 70 years old. Is that safe? Do you understand that people might worry about having a piece of kit that's that aged? The unsung hero of the fight against global warming is long-term operation. Long-term operation is basically having with half or even less the initial investment basically a new reactor that is going to be there and you say 70, I say 100. You know it's going to be closer now we see reactors that are closer to 80 years perfectly safe having undergone very far out refurbishing operations. So one important thing and we see basically this is something we see a lot in Europe these days even for countries that having embraced phase out they are feeling crunch and they see that the idea of a quick phase out was putting them in a very fragile and vulnerable situation. So we see countries like Belgium even Germany you know moving and pushing the lines towards the future. And here is where again the rigor of the IEA must be there because what we do is we work with national regulators through very intensive peer reviews to make sure that long-term operation basically is giving you a new nuclear reactor not simply an old one which is more or less you know muddling through and trying to continue to give you the energy that you need.  Well in my personal opinion yes I think still this is a matter that requires a technical scientifically sound discussion. I think from the vantage point of the nuclear sector we must also recognize political realities because in politics 2 plus 2 is not 4 and sometimes from a scientific or technical point of view it is very difficult to put your head around that and accept that people are taking decisions that do not seem too square. But it so happens and the challenge for us is to prove and to show that keeping nuclear in the equation is going to give you the energy is going to give you the solution to your climate problem is going to give you jobs is going to give you opportunities going to give you things that are very important for political people to get the votes they need. So we need to face these problems and I try to do that without prejudice. Looking at what are the reasons or what were the reasons? The perceptions that brought people to certain decisions that may seem incomprehensible but these countries that took these decisions are countries that have very intelligent people. So there was a reason behind them. But here we have an opportunity. The curve is moving in a certain direction and we have to help them come to the approaches that we believe are more sustainable. Why do people still get rid of nuclear? Why have you and the industry not won the argument on safety and what can you do to make progress? Well I think it's a combination. I like to be self-critical and I think we all need to do that. And I think that for far too long nuclear was not as open to debate. I can talk for the IEA but I think my industry friends may agree with me that we need to be out there not to talk amongst each other is very nice. We are friends with each other so it's very nice to agree with each other. But what we need to do is to go out. For example, something I do is I talk to parliaments. I talk to MPs, to parliamentarians that have a different view, a different take. Perhaps everything they got about nuclear was all negative. All they remember about nuclear was the Simpsons and they see it as a scary, even comical thing. And so it's really up to us to do a lot of work. At the same time I think regulators and national authorities have a big responsibility. As you know nuclear has a very important thing about it in most of countries where national hearings, debates are required to bring big projects to fruition. So you have to have an open discussion with society. I don't see that happening in many other energy sectors by the way. So this is something that we can be very proud of and we need to promote. The bad perception if you consider that as something that exists did not come from the blue skies. It was the result of people saying things, of people repeating things and the absence of a critical debate. So it can be reversed. It will be reversed. So I'm looking at this nice pie chart in your pavilion that says nuclear is producing 10% of the world's electricity. I think many people really agree with the beat climate change. We need to shrink that coal and increase the nuclear. When we're meeting at COP 37 in 10 years time, what will that nuclear number be? It will be much, much higher. I don't know if it will be the more than double that we need, because we need more than double, but it will be much higher. So when we discuss that time, we'll see. Excellent. Let's move on to some of the other things that you're looking at at the moment. Seriously, your year has been very dominated by the terrible events in Ukraine. You've had to make several visits to Zvapovitsia plant and what's going on there. Perhaps start by telling me what you've seen there and how dangerous a situation you feel that it is. In Ukraine, I mean. Of course, it also has to do with the viability of this, because if, God forbid, we had an accident, a nuclear accident there, then even if, as I often say, the problem is not nuclear, the problem is the war, it will be a very, very difficult challenge for the nuclear sector to address. So this as an opener, just to indicate how difficult it is at work. I think the situation in Ukraine is still extremely difficult, extremely difficult. When it comes to nuclear, I mean, this is a profoundly nuclear, civilian nuclear country with 50% of its energy before the war coming from nuclear. It's a country that depends on nuclear energy for its viability, for its economical viability. And that happens to have one of its nuclear power plants, the biggest one, the biggest one in Europe, the biggest one in Ukraine, the one producing 20% of that 50% occupied and in the hands of a foreign country. So this says it all. At the same time, we and I, as Director General of the IEA, must keep my eyes on the ball and see that my responsibility in this case is to ensure the safety and the security of a big installation which happens to be sitting on a war frontline, not in the vicinity, not nearby, not so far away, right in the frontline. I've been there, saw that. The background music of my visit to Saporizhia were mortars and wizards. Boom, boom, boom. And you are touring a nuclear power plant. So how bizarre is that, all right? So that is the reality that we are facing. The good thing or the at least positive building block is that because I need to talk with both, I need to talk with the owner, I need to talk with the occupying country that has the effective control of the place. They both recognize that the plant must be protected. First, second, they both recognize that the IEA is the institution that can, could facilitate this. So it's not the protection zone I have been advocating, but it's a beginning. Because this war, unfortunately, is not going to end tomorrow as we would all like and pray. It should and it would. So I am in the midst of a very difficult negotiation with both sides. You know, when it comes to protecting a nuclear site which is so big with six nuclear reactors, a few square miles or kilometers of facilities, associated facilities, the fuel storage areas, the labs, the admin buildings, all of that compound together. You have to be looking at radiuses. You have to be looking at admitted activities or the presence of certain security forces or not. And this is at the moment what is keeping us in this very, very difficult negotiation. At the same time, I believe, sorry, I should also mention that I have a permanent IAEA mission at the plant. So there is a permanent detachment of IAEA experts there every day. I went there and I left a gift there. And they are there, courageously informing, assisting their Ukrainian counterparts and providing us all with the information that we so desperately need. You guys in Bloomberg, before our presence there, every day you had a different story. Of course, Country A would be saying we are being shelled by them and Country B saying it's not true, everything is fantastic, we are having a picnic outside. So this was true every day. Since the IAEA, as we call it, the IAEA support and assistant mission, security safety assistant mission to Zaporizhia was installed. This has stopped and we have a clear idea of what is happening, what is happening with the outages, what is happening. So that has a tremendous value and also perhaps a deterrent value because our guys are there and they can confirm what is happening. And building from there, we are moving hopefully into the security zone which I hope to be able to achieve in the near future. There has been a lot of talk around the Ukraine war about dirty bombs and I don't want to get into the ins and outs of those accusations but keeping the supply of nuclear material in Ukraine safe and out of the hands of bad actors must be a key concern of yours. How bad are the risks? It is a big thing and actually you mentioned the issue of the dirty bombs and here you saw how useful it is to have an institution like the IAEA because these assertions were made as part of a narrative leading to the use of nuclear weapons. So we are not talking about some fictional scenarios here. We are talking about people saying, well, if there is dirty bombs, these can be considered nuclear material in a way in nuclear weapons so we could perhaps retaliate with nuclear weapons. So we were all of a sudden considering this as a realistic possibility. So what we did was immediately and within a matter of days the IEA had put together an inspection team toward three facilities one research and development facility near Kyiv, a mine and a missile production installation facility and we were able to confirm that there were no indications of deviation or any other misuse of nuclear material. So that was tremendously important, perhaps not in the context of our conversation today with them but in the context of world peace if you want. So this is one aspect and the second aspect is the proliferation aspect. And here there are two things. One is the good news, the other is the problem. The good news is that by keeping our inspection activity at Rivnek, South Ukraine, we keep all the nuclear material under control. We prevent any indication that there might be a proliferation, that there might be a review of the non-nuclear weapons state status of Ukraine which has been mentioned as well. The problem we have is of course Saporizhia. There we have been able to keep our inspection activity so far but this is going to be a challenge in the next few months if we cannot get some agreement with both sides. And we are working on it. Sorry, an agreement to what? Maintain access? To keep inspecting? What is the agreement that you're looking for? The fact is that the problem that you have is that this is a, in theory, it's a non-nuclear weapon reactor which is being under the control of a nuclear weapon state. And as you know, the inspection regime for one and the other is different.  Should I throw my hands up and say the IEA is leaving? I don't think so, but it's not going to be easy. But the Russians don't want to inspect it on the basis of being controlled by a nuclear... We are working on that. All right, well we'll leave Ukraine there. The other issue that has dominated, of course, your near three years as Director-General is Iran and the nuclear talks there, I have two questions about that. Is Iran complying with its obligations at the moment? And second, what is the outlook do you think on a deal? Iran is complying with its obligations so far, but there is a problem in one sense. The program, the civilian nuclear program of the Islamic Republic of Iran is growing enormously. And this growth of the program, which includes 60% enrichment, which includes a number of centrifuge production facilities, which includes work research and development on uranium metal, which includes all these areas, which are enormously complex, was, in a certain sense, predicated upon a level of inspection intrusiveness and intensity related to the JCPOA and to the additional inspecting abilities and oversight for my inspectors that JCPOA used to give us. So when you have that program minus all of these capacities, you do have a challenge. The JCPOA is not dead. It's struggling. The negotiations are ongoing, albeit at a painfully slow pace. We are not part of the negotiation. We are the guarantors, so we are accompanying the negotiation. We are trying to help as much as we can, so we hope that they are going to the parties in this negotiation. They are going to be able to find a space of agreement, and we are going to be able to help. If that fails, we will have to sit down with our Iranian counterparts and see what kind of approach we take in the face of their realities, their capabilities, and my obligation to check two things, that their declarations are correct, but also, and equally important, that they are complete. Thank you very much. So before we finish, I just wondered if there's anyone here who had any questions to the general. Just there.  Thank you very much for all your questions. Okay. Good afternoon. My name is Eva Jan, and thank you very much for this very interesting conversation. I just have a follow-up question on the dirty bomb claim, because dirty bombs can also use radioactive material that is not nuclear material, so not uranium, plutonium, or thorium, and I'm wondering how the IAEA can control that, because that would mean, could be any Cobalt-60 source from an industrial facility or whatever. Indeed. Well, this is a very important question, because you have huge amounts of nuclear materials in any country, and for all the good reasons, like you are saying Cobalt-60, I mean in hospitals, in many places, and these sources are mostly outside the inspection safeguards system from the IAEA. Still, there are certain things where the IAEA is helping and can help. First of all, we at the IAEA have the full inventories of sources all over the world. We work very closely with regulators, and actually when it comes to Ukraine, we are working with a Ukrainian regulator to have the national inventory, which involves close to 6,000 sources across the country under control, perhaps it's too big a word, because we don't inspect, but know where they are, and countries also have a core conduct that they need to respect, which is also established under the aegis of the IAEA on what needs to be done in terms of caring for those sources. Coupled with that, looking at this problem from the nuclear security perspective, we do have what we call the database of events related to nuclear material, where countries voluntarily come to us and they report occurrences. For example, if Ukraine came to discover that sources have been stolen or are missing, we can help when they inform us of that. Granted, it is a much higher challenge. It would be physically impossible, let alone the IAEA for anybody to be checking sources. Imagine in the United States millions of sources. It would be physically impossible to do that, but there are ways, as I was saying, through the addition, of added layers of soft-claw and number of measures that we have at our disposal to have some degree of control about them. Questions for Mr. Glossy? Okay, well, in turn, Claude? Thank you very much.