It's such a pleasure to be here today to see how the float community is really growing, and it gives me a lot of confidence that as a culture we can integrate floating, we can have integrated yoga, we've integrated meditation, and I think psychedelics are right around the corner. What I'm going to talk to you about today is how as a young man growing up when I was 18 I decided to devote my life to psychedelic drugs and to psychedelic psychotherapy, and how my experiences with John Lilly and Stan Groff influenced that decision. I'm going to tell you a bit of a story about doing LSD inside my tank that I had at my house and how important that was to me, and then I'll give you a sense of how we're doing to integrate psychedelics into the culture. Now, I grew up Jewish, born in 1953, and I have relatives in Israel that fought in the War of Independence in 1948, and so I was just raised on the Holocaust and raised on the idea that sometimes cultures and countries go crazy, and so I was focused on how I might avoid that, how this kind of mental illness is a real problem, and it felt more of a problem to me than earning money for food and shelter, kind of trying to be not escape code, trying to be safe, so I was very much focused on mental illness in a way, and also anxiety, this whole fear that if I do nothing, then one day there could be a backlash against me and my relatives and families, and I feel so grateful in a way to have been in America, which does a great job of protecting freedom. So I was also aware that Einstein had said it has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. What that means to me is that we have developed incredible intellectual capabilities, but our emotional and spiritual development has lagged behind. We're not that much different from people 2,000 years ago in terms of our passions and our irrationality, but our technology has developed to such a point that we are now affecting the planet with global warming. We're doing all sorts of things that are really endangering us, and so we have to have this accelerated development in emotional and spiritual capabilities. This was, as a young boy, I was involved in school during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and I was around 10 years old, and so that was traumatizing in another way, that it wasn't just Jewish people or minorities, it was the whole world we could end up destroying. Einstein said the splitting of the atom has changed everything, save our mode of thinking, and thus we drift towards unparalleled catastrophe. So what is this about our mode of thinking? How do we need to change that, and in what ways? And we often look towards spirituality as a way to do that, but when I turned 13, my bar mitzvah was an utter disappointment. I somehow thought I would wake up a different person, and I would have this visitation from God, and I would somehow be, skip all of adolescence, and all of a sudden I'd be grown up, and I remember lying in bed for a whole week, thinking a lot of people must have got bar mitzvah that same day, because God was taking a while to come around to me, and eventually nothing happened, and so I recognized, and many of us have, that the traditional rituals that we have available to us don't work as much as they used to. Then I was in the last year of the lottery, and I had decided what to do about Vietnam, and I was studying Martin Luther King and Tolstoy and Emerson and Thoreau, and about nonviolent resistance, and so I decided that I would become a draft resistor, and anticipated going to jail for doing that. I didn't want to run to Canada, but I ended up inadvertently coming up with an incredible strategy, which was I didn't register, and absolutely nothing happened. Roughly 60,000 people never registered, and nothing happened. I mean the computers weren't so big then, and so what I had then was this moral dilemma, should I turn myself in so that they could put me in jail, so I would be an example, and I decided that rather than being a martyr, I'm much too hedonistic, if I can avoid that, that creating the positive alternative, and I started looking around in the culture, and I saw LSD. Now this is Yoko and John, and Tim Leary's in there. LSD became a symbol of cultural rebellion, and I started thinking why was that? I still believe that LSD made you permanently crazy, that there was something bad that it did to your brain, but what I started to understand was that the mystical experience that people had, it was very interesting for me to see the talk earlier today about the default mode network with flotation, because the latest psychedelic neuroscience research is showing that the classic psychedelics affect the default mode network, and much the similarities between flotation and psychedelics, the degrees are different, but psychedelics really weaken the activity in the default mode network so that our normal ego resting state is weakened and we get a flood of information, and from that, from our not normal filtering systems, people often have these spiritual senses of connection. So I started realizing that LSD had this potential, and when Nixon started saying that Leary was the most dangerous man in America, I started thinking, what is that Leary doing that's working that's got Nixon so scared? And I believe it's this breakdown of who we think we are.  We're part of this human family, we're part of the web of life, and when that's your primary identification, there's a whole set of political implications in the direction of tolerance and compassion. Now this was also the time when we were going to the moon. My daughter in high school actually did a report on the Apollo, and one of her friends, her friend's grandfather was Michael Collins, who was piloting the ship that Neil Armstrong then went to the moon on, but he never got to the moon, but he said that when he traveled around the world afterwards, what impressed him so much is that people were saying, we did this, and that's what they, it wasn't the Americans did this, it wasn't the small group of people, it was we as a human race did this, and that was picked up by the last whole earth catalog, and we've seen a lot of these images of the earth from space, and I think we're now engaged in this globalization effort, and we're finding that there's a lot of fundamentalism that's being threatened by this globalization, and so for me the real understanding was that mysticism is the antidote to fundamentalism, and mysticism through psychedelics, this sense of connection. So I started really looking at the whole earth catalog, and I found an ad in it for a book by John Lilly. This is my copy from Ninth Printed, as you can see, 1970, and I read this, and I read this, and I read this, and this was very hard to read, it's very hard to understand, but it was this combination of LSD being taken inside the tank trying to map out how the brain works as a computer, and this is way before we've made a lot of progress with computers, and so friends and I at college started building our own isolation environments, wearing gloves, wearing goggles, things like that, and we even built a tank out of plywood with plastic liners, and we started doing a fair amount of work inside floatation tanks, and I started thinking the more LSD I took, the faster I would evolve, and it doesn't work that way, so I started having problems, and I went to the guidance counselor at my college, and this was now 1972, and I was lucky enough that he gave me a copy of Realms of the Human Unconscious by Stan Grof before it was even published, a manuscript copy, and what was in this book was the results of incredible work with LSD to map human consciousness and also to use the non-ordinary state of consciousness produced by LSD for psychotherapy with the goal of helping people, and once I read this and put it in context with the work that John Lilly had done and then realized that just as I was waking up to this the crackdown had happened, all the research was shut down all over the world, and so I thought okay this is really worth working on, and I started doing my own trips, I dropped out of college for 10 years, I did a fair amount of LSD but now very intermittently, I worked a lot on the integration process, and I started thinking I need to really talk to some of the experts, and so I decided to get in touch with John Lilly, this is now in the middle 70s, this was Roberta Quist, she was his dolphin trainer, and at a point in time he had Joe and Rosie, two dolphins that he was going to release into the wild, and I was in Sarasota, Florida, and I was able to work with a shark research lab, the dolphins in the Gulf of Mexico are the most well-studied pod in the world, and so I engineered this whole system to bring John out to possibly put his dolphins through Mote Marine Lab and release them there, but he was already moving away from science and into ketamine addiction, and it was really kind of sad, and so we ended up doing an MDMA, he was willing to do an MDMA session, but he kind of saw the damage that he was doing but he wasn't really able to respond to it, so I felt that there was a difference between him and Stan Groff, who developed what's called holotropic breath work, which is a way to modify your consciousness through hyperventilation, so both of them had these powerful research careers with LSD, with psychedelics, when the crackdown happened, Stan was able to find a way to go forward, but in a more limited way, they were both people way ahead of their time, and I think that the key difference is that Stan was focused on healing, John was focused on knowledge, and John was very impatient, and once the crackdown came, he didn't want to say, you know, now I've got 20, 30 years or whatever it is to bring back to change the culture, or 50 years, as it might be, he just sort of through kind of frustration escaped into sort of a pseudo-spirituality, where Stan went and started doing the research, and so I felt that that's where this focus on healing, and I see that so much in the flotation community, this idea of how do we actually help people, and to see the talks here about veterans with PTSD, about eating disorders, those are both areas that we're looking at very much with psychedelics, and I think that's really where the heart is, and if you can keep that focus on helping people, then it really will help with the mainstreaming. There was one time that I had this crisis in my life, and it's not a crisis that many of us men are unfamiliar with, and it's where we're in love with someone, and they say we want you to be monogamous, and then we say yes, and then we don't. So I had a woman that I was in love with that I, she was gone out of town for a school for a couple months somewhere else, that I slept with somebody else, and she broke up with me, and I felt that this was the key to, I needed to undo this, and I felt the most powerful way that I could work on that, to try to understand that was to take LSD and go in my flotation tank that I had at my house. So I took a large amount of LSD, and I ended up spending 17 hours in the tank, and it was my tank so I could pee in it. I didn't need to worry about that, and at one point I started thinking that somehow or other that she was in danger, that she was going to be committing suicide, that somehow she was going to hurt herself. There was some phone call that she missed to pick up some of her stuff, and so I kept telling myself that I had to go rescue her.  And I felt like this was in a way the closest I've come in my life to psychosis. I knew enough not to get out of the tank and just to sit with that, and it took me a couple hours before I realized that it wasn't really that she couldn't live without me, it was me worried that I couldn't live without her. And once I could sort of go through my projections and accept that, and then acknowledge that I needed to be more willing to say no, or if I don't feel like I could be monogamous, or more willing to follow through if I say yes, I felt at one point that there was these hooks that were in my cell, that like fish hooks, and that was interjected hate, and that they were like cancer, and that I would get cancer. And once I accepted what I had done, I felt that these hooks kind of released, and then I felt these pulses of light through my body, like x-rays almost, like radiation therapy. And then I felt afterwards that I was able to emerge out of the tank and try to start a new life where I could find love and be a more reliable partner. But I attribute a lot of my subsequent growth and development to the opportunity to have that time in the tank, that extended period of time in this altered state to sit through these rationalizations and psychosis. So I have a deep respect for the kind of work that can be done in that flotation tank environment with psychedelics. Now, the year after that is where the DEA started trying to criminalize MDMA. I learned about MDMA when it was still legal, and I learned about LSD, the value of it, right after the crackdown. So here I thought, okay, now I know that MDMA is legal, we can introduce it to a lot of people, but it will eventually be smashed because this was being used as ecstasy, it was the rise of Nancy Reagan and just say no. So we prepared a group of people, we worked on gathering monks and rabbis and various people, psychiatrists at Harvard and others, to start a lawsuit eventually once the DEA moved against MDMA. So here is me, this is 1984, spying on the DEA, this is right before I walk in the door to hand them this request for a hearing with a big DC law firm working pro bono on our behalf. So we had a DEA hearing, we ended up winning, the administrative law judge said MDMA should be scheduled three available to therapists, but the head of the DEA rejected the recommendation. And so it was clear to me then that the only way back is going to be through the FDA. So in 1986 I started MAPS. And what I'm going to share with you now is the results of 30 years of effort to try to legitimize and have mainstream acceptance for psychedelic psychotherapy. Now we're right now at what's called the end of phase two. Within the next two weeks we are going to be submitting data from our phase two pilot studies and sending it to the FDA for a discussion about how to move into phase three. So the first thing that you need is you need medical grade drug. So we're having one kilogram of, this is actually the factory where we're having the MDMA made. In 1985 I had a kilogram of MDMA made for $4,000 by Dave Nichols at Purdue University. It's the MDMA we still use today, 31 years later. It's an incredibly stable molecule, but it's not medical grade. It's just as pure as what we're going to get, but it doesn't have as much documentation. So now it's going to cost $400,000 for a kilogram. So we have 960 grams of the old MDMA left, and if anybody wants to ever do research with MDMA and flotation tanks or anything, we're giving it away. It's DEA licensed, FDA accepted MDMA. But we're working at a place that if we do succeed, you have to think about scaling up. So this place can scale up if we succeed. Now a lot of what you're doing, the research that I've seen today is about safety, particularly with the eating disorders. So we had to do safety studies with MDMA and this is neurocognitive function before and after the placebo, 40 milligrams, 100 milligrams in 125, and you can see before and after people actually either get better or they stay the same. So this was to counter propaganda like this. This is supposedly, this was on MTV and Oprah. This was spec scans. This is supposedly what happens to your brain from MDMA. But this is a graphically manipulated, completely fraudulent image. But a lot of people really believed it. They just put every area that had activity below a certain amount as a whole. But it was very effective in scaring people. We've now treated 107 PTSD patients, PTSD from any cause.  This is the overall data to show you. This is the line of 50 on the caps, the clinician administered PTSD scale. Everything above this is moderate to severe. They started out severe and at 12 month follow up, they're well below and most of them are about over two thirds of them no longer even qualify for PTSD. Now this is showing everybody got MDMA. Either the people get it initially in the double blind portion of the study or those that are the placebo get it what's called open label after they've completed their primary outcome measure. So this disaggregates it a little bit. This is after the two blinded sessions and this is the difference between the people that get therapy with placebo and this is therapy plus MDMA. This is after the third session. So we're going to actually as our model for phase three, we're going to have three MDMA sessions in a three and a half month process. The MDMA sessions are about three to five weeks apart and there's more or less weekly non-drug psychotherapy to prepare and to integrate the experience. And then this here is after the people who are in the placebo group get the MDMA and they all end up more or less the same. So based on this data, we believe we'll be able to make it into a medicine and we've been able to reach out to the VA. This is the highest ranking. She was Brigadier General Laurie Sutton was the highest ranking psychiatrist in the military. She called me from a plane in 2010 and she said, what's going on with this MDMA? We need help with veterans. Right now there's 868,000 veterans receiving disability for PTSD. That's as of June 30th, 2016. And it costs the US government the VA about $10 billion a year just for disability payments. So she says, when it comes to the health and well-being of those who serve, we should leave our politics at the door and not be afraid to follow the data. There's now an evidence base for this MDMA therapy and a plausible story about what may be going on in the brain to account for the effects. Now, many of you may have heard about the early work with LSD or the current work with psilocybin, with alcoholics, with nicotine addicts, and with people who are anxious about dying. And the one finding from the early research and the current research with the major psychedelics is that the depth of the mystical experience is correlated with therapeutic outcome. So we use the same measure of mystical experience in our work with MDMA. This is the placebo doses, the low doses. These are the active doses. Mean is 0.46. 0.6 means anything above that is a full mystical experience. So even with MDMA, on average, people are having not exactly full mystical experience, but pretty substantial. And many people have had full mystical experiences. And it's sort of like peering out into the universe. The blinds are off. The default mode network activity is reduced, and you're seeing more. But what we've found is that there is no correlation between the mystical experience. This is the PTSD score, and this is the mystical experience, almost perfectly flat. So that guides our therapy. Our therapy is not aimed at helping people have this mystical experience. It's non-directive, helping them cope with whatever is emerging. And the way that we're going to propose to do phase three is basically about 460 people. Half of them will be randomized, and they'll have three MDMA sessions. The first is 75 milligrams. Then they can choose to stay the same or go up. They won't know the exact doses. And then there's this intervening integrative psychotherapy here, and then two-month follow-up. And then the others will get the same therapy with placebo. So basically we're testing therapy plus placebo with therapy plus MDMA. And we have to show that it's worth it for whatever risks there are to add the drug. And we believe we'll be able to do that. It's going to cost about $25 million. We have already about half of it raised. I'd like to encourage you to use Dr. Bronner's soaps. David Bronner has pledged a million a year for five years from... And then Shauna Haley was a transgender, brilliant software person who left us 5.5 million actually in his will after he died. We used $200,000 for a study of autistic adults with social anxiety. And we're getting good results from that. And then one of the early Facebook people has pledged a million. And of course, I'm hoping they'll end up donating a lot more. This is our goal is sales of prescription MDMA. We're trying to create a new model for how drugs are marketed. One of the things that you hear, and maybe you hear a lot of it here in Oregon about how marijuana legalization, the problem is that we're going to have big alcohol, big tobacco, marketing marijuana, and they're going to market to kids and do all sorts of stuff. And that's what's causing people to be reluctant about moving to marijuana legalization. But there's a new modification for capitalism called the benefit corporation. And it's incorporated in Delaware also in California. If you have a regular corporation, you have to maximize profits. Minority shareholders could sue the management and saying you're not maximizing profits. But with a benefit corporation, you maximize social benefits. And so that's what we've created, a benefit corporation 100% owned by the nonprofit. People make tax deductible donations to the nonprofit. We invested in the benefit corp. And the benefit corp will be one day selling MDMA. Because that's not a charitable thing. That's something that we should be paying taxes on. But it is helping people to see that we're trying to not just maximize profits and roll it out as quickly as we can. We want to avoid a backlash. Now, there are no third party standards for pharmaceutical companies operating in public benefit. Not surprisingly. So we are now developing our own third party standards with some ethicists at University of Pennsylvania. And then what we're going to be doing is having therapy training programs. The only people that will be able to prescribe MDMA will be people that have been trained by the sponsor, by maps, and only in certain kind of facilities. I was very interested, these are the future facilities, I was very interested to see about the franchising of flotation centers. So you guys are ahead of us in that regard. We're anticipating MDMA would be approved in 2021 if all goes as planned. And we want to be operating multiple centers to sort of set up a standard of care. But other people will be running centers and you can have all sorts of centers. And the goal is not just a center that does MDMA and a center that does psilocybin. The goal would be centers that would perhaps be like this in beautiful locations and they would be using multiple different drugs and they would also be flotation tanks, massage. These would be sort of global kind of healing centers with both the integrative approach. So the first hospice center in America was 1974 and 30 years later in 2004 there was 3,500. So now we're speaking about maybe a 25 year rollout from now to where every community would have and you could do a Google search on psychedelic clinics at Google maps and this would be what you would find all these clinics. Now just to give you a sense of how we're doing with integrating psychedelics, the keep LSD is the quintessential symbol of the 60s, the symbol of Timothy Leary. And so we have completed a study with LSD, assisted psychotherapy. It was the first one in over 35 years with LSD in patients for people who were anxious with life-threatening illnesses. And one of things I'm most proud of is that we were able to get this study started in late 2007 which was just a few months before Albert Hoffman died at the age of 102.  This is the LSD actually that we administered. This was the paper that we wrote. Now we don't have enough resources to continue this research. We're focusing on the MDMA for PTSD but this sort of removed a taboo and really helped with the psychedelic renaissance. Now we've heard earlier today about how marijuana can be helpful for PTSD and it's kind of shocking to realize that it's easier to do research with psychedelics than it is with marijuana through the FDA. And the reason is because there has been a government monopoly on the supply of marijuana. Now being here in Oregon, the idea of a government monopoly on marijuana kind of sounds silly because you can go multiple different places and get it. But the monopoly is on federally legal marijuana and it's been in 1968 at the University of Mississippi and it's been used by the National Institute of Drug Abuse. They have that supply and they would give it to you if you want to study the risks but not the benefits. So we've tried since 1992 to do studies with marijuana and we felt if we focused on PTSD and veterans that it would be enough political pressure that we could get it approved. It took us over six and a half years. We're getting the marijuana from NIDA next week. Half of it is going to be at Johns Hopkins. The other half is going to be in Phoenix, Arizona. It was featured by Sanjay Gupta on weed three and what we're looking at is four different kinds of marijuana. High THC, well, high 12%. That's the highest you get from the government right now. But it's pretty laughable for high THC. But high THC, low CBD, low THC, high CBD, mixture, and then the placebo. And then we'll see how the different varieties affect people. And we were able to get a $2.1 million grant from the state of Colorado for this study. Now, this is a picture from 2005 when we had a lawsuit against the DEA to try to break the federal monopoly on marijuana. This is Professor Lyle Kraker at UMass Amherst. We started talking in 1999 about ending the monopoly. Here we are protesting. We won the lawsuit but just like MDMA, the DEA administrative law judge lawsuits, they make recommendations but they don't compel the head of the agency to do one thing or another. So we won the lawsuit but the DEA rejected the recommendation and just last week the DEA announced that it was going to end the monopoly on marijuana. It was going to license other providers. It's been since 1968. So the work that we are all doing, this main streaming of flotation centers, the main streaming of yoga, meditation, all of this is really changing consciousness in a lot of ways. And to give you an example, I'm leaving in a few days for Burning Man. One of the things that we've tried to do is how do we create a post-prohibition world? And it used to be that the resistance was because of the counterculture, that politicians, the powers that be, were worried that people take these drugs, they drop out, they move to farms, they won't go fight the wars, and they'll protest on all sorts of ways. And that was obviously what Nixon had in mind when he ramped up the drug war. Now it's faded. We've had all these aging baby boomers that have made great contributions, they're still living in society. Now it's parents worried about their kids. And one of the main places that young people do psychedelics is at places like Burning Man and elsewhere. So we've decided to, since 2003, we've been trying to do a project there called the Zendo, well, the Zendo came later, but it was a psychedelic harm reduction project where we will work with people who are having difficult trips and help them through them. It's like an inadvertent therapeutic opportunity, and that way they can avoid being arrested or tranquilized. And there's been a law though, the perversity of the drug war called the rave act, reducing America's vulnerability to ecstasy. And that criminalizes harm reduction methods, because that means you know drugs are being used and that's a crime, you know illegal drugs are being, it was created initially for crack houses, and they applied it to MDMA and rave. So Burning Man and other groups are scared about doing harm reduction, but the breakthrough this year and for the last several years is the BLM, the Bureau of Land Management, finally said to the organization, we don't want to take all these people that are tripping and having difficult trips. We don't know what to do with them, we don't want to arrest them, and we'd like you to take better care of them. So that's given the Burning Man organization some courage. So this is the first year that they've let us use this word, psychedelic harm reduction. And not only that, but they are putting an announcement about it in the Greeter package for all 70,000 people. So we are moving towards post prohibition work. Now the next image I'm going to show you is about, it took 10 years to do, but it's about trying to bring our Burning Man self, my Burning Man self, to Washington DC, into the political system. It took 10 years to figure out, but we've had Burning Man on the Mall. This was last November. And it's the first time in over 100 years that we're aware of that they permitted a fire on the National Mall. And this was absolutely fantastic. My favorite moment of this was 4.30 in the morning dancing with David Bronner. The DJs, we had to do cathartic dancing to protest the drug war. You can't just have a party on the Mall. It's political. You have to protest something. So this was the Drug Policy Alliance, a biannual conference in Washington. That's how we timed it. And we ended up having cathartic dancing. And at 4.30 in the morning, the DJs, now keep in mind, we're between the White House and the Washington Monument. The DJs were so loud. You could hear it in the White House. You could hear it all over. And they started playing Jimi Hendrix, the National Anthem from Woodstock. And I finally felt like it's taken almost 50 years, but now we have permission on the Mall to have Jimi Hendrix play in the National Anthem.  And the outside collapsed, and then you saw the jail cell. And then it collapsed as well. So I think this idea of mainstreaming flotation tanks, mainstreaming psychedelics, we are in a tremendous opportunity to bring into our culture things that emerged 50 years ago, but in some ways too early. And I think for John Lilly it was frustrating and he sort of escaped. For Stan Groff it was frustrating, but he tried to do the small work to little by little to make it happen. And I see the fruits of that is now really coming about. And it's been very inspiring for me to be here and see how this community itself is growing. And so I'd like to invite you all to a conference we're going to have in April in Oakland, psychedelic science. We're bringing the psychedelic researchers from all over the world and are going to be updating people on what's the latest status of the research. And the ending slide I just want to show you is this is the flotation tank that John Lilly gave to Tim Leary. And this is at Tim Leary's house. So when I look at these flotation tanks and see some of the pictures of the technology, I am just astonished. We have come a long way. We've got a long way to go, but I think we can really do it. Thank you. Thank you. Wow. Thank you.


Welcome to this CUBE Conversation sponsored by Citrix. This is the third and final installment in the Citrix Launchpad series. We're going to be talking about the Launchpad series for work. Lisa Martin here with Dyon Henchcliff, VP and principal analyst at Constellation Research. Dyon, welcome to the program. Oh, thanks, Lisa. Great to be here. So we have seen a tremendous amount of change in the last 18, 19 months. You know, we saw this massive scatter to work from home a year and a half ago. Now we're in this sort of distributed environment that's been persisting for a long time. Talk to me about, we're going to be talking about some of the things that Citrix is seeing and some of the things that they're doing to help individuals and teams. But give me your lens from Constellation's perspective. What are some of the major challenges with this distributed environment that you've seen? Sure. Well, so we've gone from this, you know, the world of work, the way that it was.  But that's starting to change. Some people are going back, although I just recently spoke to a panel of CIOs that says they have no plans anytime soon. But they're very aware that they need to have workable plans for when we start sending people back to the office. And there's this big divide. How are we gonna make sure that we have one common culture, we have a collaborative organization when, you know, a good percentage of our workers are in the office, but also maybe as much as half the organization is at home. And so how to make processes seamless, how to make people collaborate, make sure there's equity and inclusion so that the people at home aren't left out and then people in the office maybe don't have an unfair advantage. So those are all the conversations. And of course, because this is a technology revolution, remote work was enabled by technology, we're literally looking at it again for this hybrid work, this divided organization that we're gonna have. You mentioned culture, that's incredibly important, but also challenging to do with this distribution. I was looking at some research that Citrix provided, asking individuals from a productivity perspective for, and two thirds said, hey, for our organizations that have given us more tools for collaboration and communication, yes, we are absolutely more productive. But the kicker is the same amount of people about two thirds that answered the survey said, we've now got about 10 tools. So complexity is more challenging. It's harder to work individually, it's harder to work in teams. And so Citrix is really coming to the table here with the Launchpad series for work saying, let's help these individuals and these teams because as we think, and I'm sure you have insight, Diane, on this as well, this hybrid model that we're starting to see emerge is gonna be persistent for a while. Yeah, for the foreseeable future, because we don't know what the future holds. So we'll have to hold the hybrid model as the primary model and we may eventually go back to the way that we were, but for the next several years, it's gonna be that. And so we're trying to wrap our arms around that. And I think that we're seeing with things like the Citrix announcements, a wave of responses saying, all right, let's really design properly for these changes. We kind of just adapted quickly when everyone went remote last year, but now we're actually adding features to streamline, to reduce the friction, to simplify remote work, which does use, you have to use more applications. You have to switch between different things. You have to, you know, your employee experience in the digital world is just more cluttered and complicated, but it doesn't have to be. And so, you know, we can look to some of these announcements to Rashi, I think address some of that. Let's break some of that down because to your point, it doesn't have to be complex, complicated. It shouldn't be, and initially this scatter was, let's do everything we can to ensure that our teams and our people can be productive, can communicate, can collaborate. And now, since this is going to be persistent for quite some time, to your point, let's design for this distributed environment, this hybrid workforce of the future. Talk to me about the, one of the things that Citrix is doing with Citrix Workspace, the app personalization. I can imagine as an individual contributor, but also as a team leader, the ability to customize this to the way that I work best is critical. And it really is, especially when you have workers, 18 or 19 months worth of new hires that you've never met, they don't really feel like, this is maybe their organization, but if you allow them to shape it a little bit, make it contextual for them, so they don't just come into this cookie cutter, digital experience that actually is kind of more meaningful for them, it makes it easier for them to get their job done and things are the way that they want them and where they want them. I think that makes a lot of sense. And so, the app personalization announcements is important for remote workers in particular, but all workers to say, hey, can I start tailoring parts of my employee experience so they make more sense for me? And I feel like I belong a little bit more, so I think it's significant. It is. Let's talk about it from a security perspective though. We've seen massive changes in the security landscape in the last year and a half. We've seen some Citrix data that I was looking at, said between 2019 and 2020 ransomware up 435%. Malware up 358%. And of course, the weakest link being humans. Talk to me from a Citrix workspace perspective about some of the things that they've done to ensure that those security policies can be applied. Well, and the part that I really liked about the launchpad announcements around work in terms of security was this much more intelligent analysis. One of the most frustrating things is you're trying to get work done remotely and maybe you're in crunch mode and all of a sudden the security system clamps down because they think you're doing something that you might be sharing information you shouldn't be and now you can't get your deadline met. I really liked how the analytics inside the new security features really trying to make sure they're applying intelligent analysis of behavior. And only when it's clear that a bad actor is in there doing something then they can restrict access, protect information. And so I have no doubt they'll continue to evolve the product so that it's even more effective in terms of how it can conclude or exclude bad actors from doing things inside your system. And so this is the kind of intelligent security increasingly based on AI type technologies that I think that'll keep our workers productive but clamp down on the much higher rate of bad activity we see out there because we do have so many more end points. There's a thousand more times more end points than today's organizations because of remote work. Right. And one of the things that we've seen with ransomware I mentioned this numbers that Citrix was sharing it's gotten so much more personalized. So it's harder and harder to catch these things. One of the things that I found interesting, Dianne that from a secure collaboration perspective that Citrix is saying is that, you know we need to go security needs to go beyond the devices and the end points and the apps that an employee is using which of which we said there are at least 10 apps that are being used today and it needs to actually be applied at the content level the content creation level. Talk to me about your thoughts about that. I think that's exactly right. So if you know the profile of that worker and the types of things that they normally do and you see unusual behavior that is uncharacteristic that worker because you know their patterns, the types of content the locations of that content that they might normally have access to and if they're just accessing things periodically that's usually not a problem when they suddenly access a large volume of information and appear to be down when those are the types of issues and especially of content they don't normally use for their work then you can intervene and take more intelligent actions as opposed to just trying to limit all content for example so that knowledge workers can't actually get access to all that great information in your IT systems you can now give them access to it but when clearly something bad is happening the system automatically does it and steps in. I was looking at some of the data with respect to updates to Citrix analytics that it can now auto change permissions on shared files to read only. I think you alluded to this earlier when it detects that access sharing is going on. And inappropriate access sharing.  Well when you have a system that's continually monitoring and the unblinking gaze of Citrix security capabilities are looking at the patterns not just the content alone or just the device alone but at the usage patterns and saying I can make this read only because that's clearly, we don't want them to be able to download this because this activity is completely out of bounds or very unusual. Right, one of the things also that Citrix is doing is integrating with Microsoft Teams. I was listening to a fun quiz show the other day that said what were the top two apps downloaded in 2020? And I guess one of them correctly TikTok though I still don't know how to use it. And the second one was Zoom and I'm sure Microsoft Teams is way up there. I was looking at some stats that said I think as of the spring of 2020 there were 145 million daily users of Microsoft Teams. So from a collaboration perspective something that a lot of folks are dependent on during the pandemic. And now within Teams I can access Microsoft Workspace? Yeah, Citrix Workspace. Yes, well, and it's more significant than it sounds because there's a real hunger to find a center of gravity for the employee experience. Where do I put that? Where should they be spending most of their time? Where should I be training them to focus most of their attention? And obviously workers collaborate a lot and Teams as part of Office 365 is just a juggernaut. The rise of it during the pandemic has been incredible. To show this, I have a Digital Workplace Advisory Board. It's companies who I think are the farthest along in designing digital employee experiences. And 31% of them said this January that they're planning on centralizing the employee experience in Teams. Now, if you're a Citrix customer, you have Workspace, you go, how do I, I don't wanna be left out. This announcement allows you to say you can have the goodness of Teams and its capabilities and the power of Citrix Workspace and you have them in one place. And really creating a true center of gravity and simplifying and streamlining the employee experience. You don't have this fragmented pieces. Everything's right there in one place in one pane of glass. And so I like this announcement. It brings Citrix up to parody with a lot of their competitors and actually eclipsed several of them as well. So I'd really like to see this. So then from within Teams, I can access Citrix Workspace. I can share documents with team members and collaborate as well. Is that kind of the idea? Yes, that is the idea. And of course, they'll continue to evolve that. But now you can do your work in Citrix Workspace and when documents are involved and you wanna bring your team in, they're already right there inside that experience. That ability to streamline things so critical given the fact that we're still in this distributed environment. I'm sure families are still dealing with some amount of remote learning or there's still distractions from the, do I live at work? Do I work from home environment? One of the groups I really felt for when this happened, Diane was the contact center. I thought these poor people, more people now with shorter and shorter fuses trying to get updates on whatever it was if they had something ordered and of course all the shipping delays. And the contact center of course went scattered as well and we've got people working from home trying to do their jobs. Talk to me about some of the things that Citrix is doing to enable with Google this contact center workers to have a good experience so that ultimately the employee experience is good so was the customer experience. The contact center worker has it the toughest of all of the different employee profiles I've seen. They have the most, they have to learn the most number of applications. They're typically not highly skilled workers so they might only just have a high school of education yet they're being asked to cram all of these technologies each one with a different employee experience. And they don't stay very long as a result of that. You might train them for two months before they're effective and they only stay for six months on average. And so both businesses really want to be able to streamline onboarding and provisioning and getting them set up and effective. And they want it too. If you want happy contacts and workers making your customers happy and staying around. And so this announcements really allows you to deploy pre-configured Citrix Workspaces on Chrome OS so that if you need to feel the whole bunch of workers or you have a big dose A you're a relief company and you have a lot of disaster care workers you can suddenly just issue them these devices very easily that are ready to go with their employee experience and all the right things in place so they can be effective with the least amount of effort. So I think it's a big step forward for a worker that is often neglected and underserved. Right, definitely often neglected and you brought up a good point there. And one of the things that peaked in my mind is you talked about the onboarding experience the retention. Well these contact center folks are the front lines to the customer. So from a brand reputation perspective that's on the line for companies in every industry where people with short uses are dealing with contacts and our folks. So the ability to onboard them to give them much more seamless experience is critical for the brand reputation customer retention for every industry I would imagine. Absolutely. Especially when you're setting up a contact center or you have a new product launching and you got to bring on board all of these new workers you can do it and they're gonna have the least challenges. They're gonna be ready to go right out of the box be able to receive their package with their device and their Citrix employee experience ready to go. Just turn the machine on and they're off to the races. And that's the vision and that's the right one. So I was glad to see that as well. Yeah, fantastic. One of the things also that Citrix did the Citrix Workspace app builder so that Citrix Workspace can now be a system of record for certain things like collaboration surveys maybe even COVID-19 information that system of record talked to me about why that's so critical for the distributed worker. So we've had this longstanding challenge in that we've had our systems of record you know these are our CRM systems ERP things like that which we use to run our business and then we've had our collaboration tools and they're separate even though we're collaborating on sales deals and we're collaborating on our supply chain and so like the team's announcement was in the same band we say let's close that gap between our systems of record and our collaboration tools. Well, this announcement says, all right well we still have these isolated systems of record how can we streamline them and build and start connecting together a little bit so that we have processes that might cross all of those things, right? So if an order comes in from the CRM system then you can complete it in the ERP system you know ordering that product for them so they actually get it. And that's probably overkill that scenario for this particular example but for example collecting data from workers saying let's build some forms and collect some data and then feed it to this process or this system of record you can do it much more easily than before before you would have to hire a development team or a contractor to develop another system that would integrate CRM ERP or whatever. Now you can do it very quickly inside that builder first simple basic applications and get a lot of the low hanging fruit off your plate and we're automated inside of your of your Citrix workspace. And automation has been one of the keys that we've seen to streamlining worker productivity in the last 18 months. Another thing that I was looking at is you know the fact that we have so many different apps and we're constantly switching apps context is constantly changing. Is this sort of system of record going to allow or reduce the amount of context switching that employees have to do? Yeah, almost all of these announcements have some flavor to that saying can we start bringing more systems together in one place? You're not switching between applications you don't have different and disconnected sets of data that if you need to and that they are disconnected you can connect them, right? That's what the app builder announcement again is about saying, all right if you're always using these three applications to do something and you're switching between them maybe you can just build something to connect them into one experience and you know maybe a low level IT person or even a business user can do that that's the big trend right now. That's so important for that continued productivity as things will continue to be a little bit unstable I guess for a while. One more thing that I saw that Citrix is announcing is integrations with write. I've been a write user myself. I like to have program project management tools that I can utilize to keep track of projects but they've done a number of integrations one of them with write signature which I thought was really cool. So for the secure e-signature within write based on a program or a project that you're working on talk to me about some of the boosts to write that they've done and how do you think that's going to be influential in the employee experience? Well, first let's just say that the write acquisition was a really important one for Citrix to go above just the basic digital workplace and simple systems of record. This is a really a mass collaboration tool for managing work itself. And so this is taking Citrix up the stack in the more sophisticated work scenarios and when you are in more sophisticated work scenarios you want to be able to pull in different data sets so they have the Citrix share file support. You want to be able to bring in really important things like signing contracts or signing sales deals or mortgage applications are all sorts of exciting things that actually run in your business and so write signature support is really important so that when you have key processes that involve people putting signatures on documents you can just build collaborative work management flows that take that all that into account without having to lead the experience. Everything's in one place as much as possible. And this is the big push that we need to have all these different systems. We don't have too many apps. What we have is too many touch points. Let's start combining some of these and so the right integrations really help you do that. Well, ultimately it seems like what Citrix is doing with the work launch pad series all the announcements here is really helping workers to work how and where they want to work which is very similar to what we say when we're talking about the end user customer experience when tech companies like Citrix say we have to meet our customers where they are. Sounds like that's the same thing that's happening here. It is and I would just add on top of that and to make it all safe. So you can bring all these systems together work from anywhere and then you can feel confident that you're gonna do those so securely and safely. And it's that whole package I think that's really critical here. You're right, I'm glad you put up that security. All right, Diane, take out your crystal ball for me as we wrap things up. You're saying, you know, going into the future we're gonna be moving from this distributed workforce to this hybrid. What are some of the things that you see as really critical happening in the next six to nine months? Well, there's a real push to say we need to bring in all the workers that we've hired over the last year maybe not bring them in in person but can we use these collaborative tools and technologies to bring them, hold them closer so they get to know us. And so, you know, things like having Microsoft Teams integrated right into your Citrix workspace makes it easier for you to collaborate with remote workers and inside any process wherever you are. So whether you're in the office or not it should bring workers closer especially those remote ones that are risk of being left out as they move to hybrid work. And it's really important. And so the things like the app builder are gonna also allow building those connections. And I think that workers and businesses are really gonna try and build those bridges because the number one thing I'm hearing from business leaders and IT leaders is that we're worried about splitting into two different organizations. The ones that are remote and the ones that are in the office. And any way that we can bring all of them together in an easy way in a natural way situate the digital employee experience. So we really, we're back to one company one common culture. Everybody has equal access and equity to the employee experience. That's gonna be really important. And I think that Citrix Launchpad announcements around work really are a major step in the right direction for that. There's still more things that have to be done. And all vendors are working on that. But it's nice to see really like what Citrix is doing here to move the ball forward towards where we're all going. It is nice to see and those connections are critically important. It happened to be at an in-person event last week and several folks had just had been hired during the pandemic and just got to meet some of their teams. So in terms of getting that cultural alignment once again this is a great step towards that. Diane, thank you for joining me on the program talking about the Citrix Launchpad series for work. All the great new things that they're announcing and sharing with us some of the things that you see coming down the pike. We appreciate your time. Thanks Lisa for having me. For Diane Hinchcliffe, I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching this CUBE conversation.


I'm going to show you a really easy website that you can use to play some interactive maybe timed kind of trivia games maybe for review or other activities in your classroom. I always played Jeopardy with my kids in a classroom but I had the whole elaborate program and the tools with the buzzers and the display and the Jeopardy board. We don't all have the money to do that or the scholastic points to buy some $500 piece of equipment so we look for free things. This tool CrowdBuzzer can kind of fill that void for some people so basically it's a tool that you can verbally ask a question and kids can click a button on their screen and the teacher can see who rang in first so if you're looking for some quick responses or a way to identify which person student or team rang in first this is your tool. So all you need to do is go to ccg.buzz slash host and what you'll be greeted with is name your activity. So I'm just going to name this demo one and click the begin button and what I get is a table with nothing in it. I don't have anybody in yet. So what I do then is I have students go to ccg.buzz. When they get there they get a code that they need to type in. All you need to do is give them the code in the top left corner of your screen. So this is 25 hl. All my students need to do is type in 25 hl and join. What they'll be asked is their name and their team name. Now there's a couple ways you can play this.  So that means you might have 25 people playing but if you have it broken down into teams you could just put the team name in here and leave it there. But if you have every student have their own device and they're working as a team you could also have them put in their name and their team name. So there's a lot of ways you can do this and it's something that you'll play around with and figure out exactly how you want to set yours up. That's up to how many devices you have whether you want every student to ring in for themselves or if you want them to collaboratively have to do it. Either way it's all up to you. Then they click the enter button and they're greeted with this ready button and they're waiting for you to turn on the game and that will be your next step. Okay now that you have set up your game and all of your students have set up their devices and they're ready to go they will all have this gray ready button on your screen. You're just going to have a blank little table here. Go over to where it says buzzers are and right now it says off. I'm going to click that to on and then you'll see what happens on all the student devices. So I'll click it to on and all their devices show up as red. That means it's ready for them to buzz in. So now's the time I would ask a question like what color is the sky and as soon as one of those players knows the answer they're going to click the red button in the middle of their screen and what that will do is my screen will record who rang in first. So we'll start with I'll go to Bob then I'll go down to Joe and then I'll go to Sue. So when Bob rings in he knows the answer Sue or Joe rings in and then Sue. So whatever order they came in their buttons will turn green so they know they've rung in and my screen will show the order in which they rang in. So then I can go through on my end and just say okay the first team were the slugs and I could ask them their answer and if you're playing a jeopardy style game if they get it right they get the points or however your system or whatever game you're playing is but this gives you the order in which the teams answered. When I'm ready to go answer another question all I would have to do is click the on button turn it off all of their buttons get reset back to the ready button and when I'm ready for the next question just click it back on again they ring in I can see what order they came in so I could keep doing this for question after question just reset hit the on button again and whatever order they ring in so it's really easy really quick if you're doing something that's speed based or first person to answer it's as simple as just resetting by clicking the on button turning it off removes everything turn it back on and whatever order they buzz in shows up on your screen


Hi everyone, Joe for Jaspy's CaseBreaks.com coming at you with 2019 Panini Prison Football. Hobby pack, break number 38. 10 of those NT football spots are giving away that NT also 2019, so we're kind of in 2019 mood. Big thanks to this group right here, Jared grabbing a huge chunk of spots.  All teams are in, let's do the break first and then the second guys will be for the giveaway part. Let's roll it, randomize it, three and a six, nine times for names and teams. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, and nine. Nine times for the teams, two, three, four. Yeah, how did the hitter before him get on base pro far? One out, Padres have a runner on first and Juan Soto up to bed. Here's the first half of the list right here and the second half of the list right over there. Ryan, the Cardinals, this is 2019 and this is a pack from a fresh box. All right, no trade windows in these, let's just print and rip.  And instead, runners on first and second one out, Bryson Stott was kind of falling away and sort of threw that ball high and away and it just flipped off the top of the glove. Fresh box. I knew you were gonna say that, Rex. I was like, I hope Rex doesn't mention that he was on the top spot there because that spot never ever matters. So it's a moot point, 11-12. So we're gonna generate a number. We'll go back to Rand.org, generate a number between one and 12. So one in the front, 12 in the back, seven. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven. All right, good luck. I don't think there's an autograph here but we've got Chris Harris, four out of 75, Green, Scope, Caden Smith and Sean Murphy, Bunting. All right, nothing too crazy there but we did get a numbered card for the Broncos. That'll be for Jared. And now let's see who's gonna win those spots in that NT break. Let's flip back over here to the main list. Let's gather everybody's names, one through 32, second dice roll, top 10 after eight, three out of five, eight times. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven and once more, eighth and final time, eight. So from 11 on down, it's gonna be sad times for Jared although Jared did get a ton of spots. He's gotta be up there somewhere, right? In the top 10. Good luck, everybody. We've got Jared, Nicholas is in, Aaron is in, Jared, Jared, Jared, Jared, Rex and Jared. There you go, Rex, see? Nothing to worry about. There's the top 10 after eight. Thanks very much, everybody. I'll see you in the next break, jaspyscasebreaks.com.


The talk by Sebastian Deffener unfortunately had to be canceled, but we now have De Vera Sagal, and she will give a 30 minute talk on quantum flicker noise in atomic and molecular junctions. And Vera, I'll give you a heads up after after 20 minutes. Okay, thank you. I will share my screen. Just a moment to organize it. Can you hear me properly. We hear you and and I see your screen as your cursor. Okay, thank you very much for this very nice organization and today is about quantum stochastic thermodynamics so I hope I fit in here. I'm going to tell you indeed about a platform and a specific experiment that very well fit into studying a some of the questions some of the topics that were raised in this conference. We will talk about whether it's different bounds trade off so other questions regarding stochastic thermodynamics specific title a quantum flicker noise in atomic and molecular junction. This work was done actually by an experimental group and our role was just to support them to model from the theoretical side to suggest the theoretical picture but I will describe the experiment and I will also try more broadly to describe this platform that again could be used when we have used it actually to study other questions. So the reference to the, the work is written here below I will get back to that and you can already see in this illustration, what the system is about I don't think it was mentioned so much at this conference. These red pencil like objects are actually gold electrodes. So just plain gold. And as you can see the system is I hope you can see my hands. It's banned. And the idea here indeed is to control very carefully the separation between these gold electrodes such that eventually you can create a very small constriction a very fine. You can see here in the, yeah, the edge here are only few at home at this contact region such that you can realize quantum conductors, and the extreme limit of actually pulling it and again stretching it in a very careful way you can even break this junction. And in between you can trap molecules and also study how molecules single molecules conduct electrons. So that's experimental setup ignore the circuit here it's the circuit is for something else but overall you apply voltage and you measure charge current in the system. Just a moment here. So how do we think about the conduction of electrons in the system a very rough model and I will get back to that later on. We think about this see supposed to represent this very narrow constriction in between. So small just few atoms in this gap or even one atom. The pictures that we have in mind is that electrons transfer this region coherently. So the mean free path is just longer than this constriction length, such that there are no scattering processes within the same sea region. Outside that yeah these are the other regions I will get back to them later of course there could be defects there are other scouterers and life are more hectic. So we measure in this experiment as I've said they apply voltage the measure measure charge current there are also other possibilities you can also apply temperature difference. And this is really just my matlab depiction of here is a charge current as a function of time and again if you can watch me yeah you get this a fluctuating current. So you can just calculate the average current and from there you can already gain a lot about the system, whether they are interesting interactions between electrons or between electrons and phonons electron and the environment. So oftentimes people just ignore the fluctuations but this is where we are here this week, trying to find out what we can learn from fluctuations. So overall in my group, we have been indeed looking at the current noise for charge or as you have just heard before, for energy transport, motivated by different questions, and very briefly just to lay down yeah what could be the, what are the several aspects of noise. As we just have heard, looking at noise can help us understand whether methodology is actually thermodynamically consistent read feed for example suffers from issues, fundamental issues. Question number two, and that concerns the talk, my talk, what information can we gather can we gain from current noise that is obscured in the mean current itself. And number three which I will touch very briefly but it was a motivation for me and many talks that we've heard. So this also means something about the performance of your system in terms of the thermodynamically in terms of trade off relations in terms of bounds and I will also say something about that. Oh yeah so I have here I just did some illustrations okay for the second law the microscopic level question about devices what we can learn for about charge transport and questions about trade off or bounds concerning fluctuations not just the mean power or efficiency. So this is an outline of a different talk that I've never given, I guess my dream talk about noise, which I'm only going to talk about the flicker noise highlighted in yellow, but in my dream talk I divided to three parts I will, I would have talked about these interesting relationships that many people have worked on in my group we focused on what they mean in the quantum domain, the thermodynamic uncertain uncertainty relation. This bound at the center of the page on the tighter bound on efficiency or yeah we'll say actually few words about it in the next slide. And then I will tell you about different measurements so we have been working with an experimental group my group is only doing theory. And collaborating with an experimental group and trying to understand from the theory side, different aspects of noise and finally method development, which is also close to our heart. But again today just for the flicker noise and yeah maybe in the future. So here is Matthew once more I wanted to advertise another project of him from last year which is relevant to the to my talk here. So here's the aspect of this type of system and electronic conducting system you can see here in a illustration below. So one can test the thermodynamic uncertainty relation and this is a y axis here. And our point in the study was to point out that in the quantum domain you can actually fully violated so that's a black line here. You can design the conducting junction. In the picture here in the inside you can see the transmission function such that you get something which is really not interesting because there is no bound it's really the uncertainty relation is such that they are from the last from the right side from the lower bound you just get zero. However, our point in the study was that once you get beyond this idealized limit of a very perfect box car type transmission function, you actually recover the cost precision trade of relation and that's a dashed blue line. So I will not dwell on the study but I'll call you to look at it, and another work related to fluctuations which again involve Matthew and I realize. And again, can be realized with the platform that I'm going to discuss in more details concern this interesting game. So what do we have here. This we proved it in in our response and we also tested it beyond in our response it's generally valid for people have demonstrated violations say in some special cases. So what we have here if we focus on the heat engine that's a thermoelectric power generator that is illustrated here for quantum dot system. Why not the center supposed to represent a quantum dot and at the left and right we have two metal electrodes, a different chemical potentials and a different temperatures, and the idea is to use heat and generate work in the form of electron transfer and form of power output, electrical power output. So the efficiency we all know what it means it's really just about the output power over the input heat. So that would be just a efficiency when I think about the means what we have here at the center which we refer to us it was the same type of ratio of power output power over input heat but now for the variance. So this is what we refer to us it too it looks like efficiency but for the fluctuations and at the right hand side is a karma efficiency. So this is an interesting tighter bound for efficiency or you can also think about it as a bound on relative fluctuations for input heat and output power. And again we tested it and try to understand implications and it can be also tested with atomic scale and molecular junctions. Okay, so finally today type of to present this platform. I've been working in the last five years with the group of oriental from the Weizmann Institute and back then he's graduate student of fear. And again you can see here the type of experimental system that they have been working on. Now, if again it's just a scheme but trying to show the atoms and doing the game. So this is all gold and again it's banded with that's the way they control the separation between the two metal electrodes. And they can control it such that there are few atoms in the region in the contact region or ultimately only one. And what they would measure the very basic quantity quantity would be just the electrical conductance. Yeah, so it's really just a voltage current over voltage in units of the quantum of conductance genot. So let's focus on the top one in blue. This is conductance histogram so we refer to it. So you just see counts and what does it mean they repeat the experiment many many times generating such junctions with few atoms in the contact region measuring the conductance and again reforming the junction. So these are the histograms and as you can see for example you get many points around conductance, which here in the units of genome is about one. And that refers to according to theory, having about single single atom in the contact region. But you also have as you can see conductance at multiple values of quantum of conductance. And again the theory here describes or corresponds to having multiple atoms in the contact region for the so the top blue one was just a pure gold and contact region. One below concerns the situation where the system is peppered with hydrogen molecules. And the main distinction here if you look here at the tail is that you start to notice that you do get some junctions some of these setups, where the conductance is below one. And in this situation where the conductance is so long. These are situations when you actually break the junction there is no longer in this single gold atom at the contact region, but actually only a single hydrogen molecule sitting there in whatever conformation it lives. So that's why there is some yes you can see some variance in the what could be the value of the conductance, but these corresponds to having single molecule in the junction. So this is a basic measurement of just electrical conductance. But obviously, as I mentioned before they are also doing noise measurements or not just a charge current but also focusing on not just the mean current but also its fluctuations. So the basic observable here would be the power spectrum of the current, and that's this S of omega so yeah you take the current. And you have the fluctuations around the mean, and they take the full transform absolute value square and that's what we refer to as a power spectrum of the current. Experimentally, they would get something quite messy. So that's this figure at the right hand side. That's a power spectrum as a function of frequency. And the different lines as you can see there are many each one is saying it's all for one single junction but changing the voltage. And the chaos at the center corresponds to what happens with the detector so ignore this mess at the. Overall, you can see that the power spectra has different regions. There is a what we refer to as a white noise region where the power spectrum does not depend on frequency. And you can extract a lot of interesting information about the system from there. And then there is a region. Here it is, which we refer to as one over F noise, because if you analyze it more carefully. It always pays us one over F or one over frequency. And it has different names, pink noise flicker noise RTS sometimes yeah, but that's what I refer to as a flicker noise. So, generally when a orange group and other groups in this community have measured the power spectrum, they focused on the white noise component, and again try to understand what oftentimes in this community is referred to as short noise. And it has been, it has been used in the last is it already 30 years or so to study many interesting effects in correlated electron system for example or electron phonon effects, just based just by watching the noise and analyzing it. And but today I will focus on the one over F noise and indeed a question that Owen came up with couple of years ago was, is it really just garbage, because that's how people treated this one over F noise in this community for a long time it was really just a new sense. We're exploring this component of the noise. But the question is whether it actually tells us something useful about quantum transport. And that's what we were about here and yeah I guess it's about 10 more minutes to get to that. But before that I wanted to mention that one over F noise is very ubiquitous in many systems in physics not just in electronic devices. It has been a hot topics for many years. Still there is a broad community that is very much after it. In electronic devices, the agreement is that it's not very exciting. I mean this way it is a component of the noise that you see over there at low frequency. It's a, it's a new sense for measurements for detectors, because as you can see when you go to low frequencies it diverges, but the physical origin which people were after and quite curious about this for electronic devices. And that's because of different defects in the system so because of imperfections in the design in these materials, where you have defects that oftentimes are referred to as two level system fluctuators that can change their mobile or they can change their confirmation, such that they change the, they lead to changes to fluctuations in the current. So the argument in the community and indeed in physics or in engineering in the last decade or even more these studies of one over F noise were very much in the engineering community. Just trying to get rid of it rather than think more deeply whether there is something interesting quantum mechanically that you can learn about your system. Yeah so here's a collection of reviews you know when a field already has many reviews it means that it's maybe not so exciting. So here's in the already a century, moving from solid state systems to graphene devices and even more so in the last 10 years or so thinking about one over F noise, indeed more creatively. What can we learn about it, thinking about single molecule devices or single graphene sheet. This last slide also wanted to mention that one over F noisy revival also because of quantum technologies. It is a hindrance in superconducting qubits and this is a conference from last year very interesting and touching the one over F noise, this low frequency noise and from different directions. Okay, so back to this slide or back to this picture of you know it's just an illustration of the power spectral noise as a function of frequency. We're going to tie enough frequencies we see it getting to the white noise region, but low frequency. Yeah we have this one over F noise. And again people asked, where does it come from is it because some fluctuations in the contact region. Is it because a molecule changes conformation. Maybe there are slow processes where the molecule moves between different states. Is it because we arrangement processes again of gold atoms maybe in the contact. So these are the types of questions that were interrogated. Now, what theory are we going to use to actually try to model this effect. So far what we did, which is, we think appropriate for the systems that were studied but of course once going to more rich system one would need to include electron electron effects. What we have used so far is a theory of non interacting electrons a very basic one. It's called Landau scattering formalism as you can see quite from some time ago, quantum coherent transport the idea is that the mean free path of electron is longer than the constant length of the size of this construction. So this picture is taken from a different context but I just liked it because of again you can see this atoms around and the size of the construction. And again the idea is that atomic contact is atomic scale atomic scale. So what do we think about it theoretically with this quantum coherent transport, the main name quantity that we consider is so called transmission probability or transmission function which is energy dependent in general. So the conductance the electrical conductance one can show is given by the sum or overall it's given by the total transmission for ability and the transmission probability can be decomposed into come to contributions of different so called channels. It really depends on the system. If you are into something that is at the level of mesoscopic or even microscopic something like waveguides, this could be transverse modes that are the different modes of your system, and each of them could contribute different contribution to the overall conductance. At the atomic scale or molecular scale the different channels really correspond to different orbitals that line up together to contribute to the conduction. So there is a lot of, there is a big deep connection between the transmission function and the actual atomistic or molecular level picture of what actually drive allows electrons to transfer the system. But again from the theoretical part, the creature that we are going to look at is a transmission probability and considering that there are multiple possible multiple channels multiple orbitals that allow transport of electrons in the system. So if you just measure the conductance I showed you before the histogram, you just know that it's a total transmission that it gives you, but you don't know how many channels are possibly contributing, and what is relative or what is the contribution of each one of them. So you are really missing some insight into what's going inside your system by just measuring the total conductance. Noise measurements come to play. This is an example at least where they can be useful. From noise measurement you can start to dig in more deeply into your system and find more information about these different transmission channels and their contribution. And obviously if there are interactions you get into another application of noise measurements. But today I'm just going to focus on this decomposition of total transmission into the separate channels. You've got about 10 minutes left. Thank you. So yeah so this is where I'm finally getting into the experiment. Again, contribution experimental work was done by Oren and his student from my group, Abhay and Junji, a former postdoctoral fellows contribute to the modeling. So this is again from the experiment they measured in so you can see here the noise as a function of frequency. The different lines are just for repeating experiments, forming again these junctions. And first they verify this one over F dependence. And the basic question was, yeah, can we learn something useful about from this one over F component about the system. So this is a summary of the results and last time allows I will get into more details. I already told you that the total electrical conductance of the system is just given by the total conductance so you by measuring the left side the conductance. You don't know about the decomposition into different channels, what people have been doing in the last 20 years or so they also measure the short noise, which is a white noise regime here. So really what one can show is that it's given by this interesting connection again between transmission contributions. So as you can see the second equation is distinct in terms of the functional form of transmission from the first one, meaning that if you have, let's say two channels you can play with these two equations if you measure both the conductance and the short noise. And now you can start to analyze and find out what are the channels and what is their contribution. But these are just two equations. And what we showed in this work and that's indeed the main contribution here. The third equation and we show that the flicker noise here there is obviously one over F dependence which is not, I omitted it here from here, but the pre factor of this one over F, again depends on the transmission probability in this form. This is distinct from the short noise it distinct from the form of the electrical conductance. And as such, it's another no to learn about the transmission channels in the system. So again from the fundamental side I will point is that the one over F noise emerges indeed from mobile defects in the junction so this is a picture that I'm trying to show here. Yeah, you can see the red and blue lines. There are some for electrons crossing the system. There are some scatterers that lead to this reflection probability. So this is the origin of the one over F noise just having this mobile defects. That's just the usual story. What is interesting is here is that the total transmission is given by this superposition of processes of electron going directly left to right or electron doing this. The process where it's scattered by the same mobile defects, such that the pre factor of the one over F noise does tell us something useful. It does tell us about the channel decomposition. So that's the main story here the one over F dependence itself is again sorry boring, but the pre factor does convey a useful information about the quantum transport of electrons in the system. So the sketch of the derivation here I will not get into the detail the sketch is that the total transmission probability for an electron is given by an interference process where some electrons. So not so much one pathway is going directly so that's a black one, and that's the one here. There are some processes to the lowest order in the in the collecting these processes where either there is a scattering by defect at the left side, or there is a scattering by defect at the right side, and overall the transmission amplitude is given by the difference of these effects. And when I calculate from here, the current, and then the power spectrum, I will find the, the one over F contribution showing up due to these defects, but furthermore I will see this town when I take the absolute value square it will become our square and from the reflection amplitude I will get the additional one minus now. So here I will just summarize a what we can learn from this. So this is a power spectrum again the details you can see in the supplementary material how we derive this expression, but this is from the theory part our prediction of how the power spectrum should look like. There is a voltage dependence. It was verified experimentally v square. There is a one over F dependence. Okay, well that's one can verify but the interesting part again is that the pre factor tells you about this interference of electrons and it does depend on the transmission probability in this unique one. So in the last few minutes I'll just mention what experimentally they did. We came up with this expression and from the experimental side they repeatedly generated constructed these junctions. So each dot here each circle corresponds to an experiment. So in the theory side we in the gray region, we predicted where they should find them junctions well. Yeah what are the possible values for the flicker noise as a function of conductance so that's a, yeah that's a region where you, you can measure flicker noise. The magnitude that you can measure for the system. And indeed, I hope it's convincing. Most of the points say or we could at least rationalize what's happening. Let's say in the region in terms of the lower bound also in the upper bound in terms of how many channels and what's their relative contribution. And furthermore I will skip that another useful. This is actually an application of the study I mentioned to you that there are now three equations that we can use to decompose the transmission total transmission into the separate channels. So if you focus for example on point number one that's a measurement of the final factor the white noise short noise measurement, as well as the electrical conductance. So if you just use these two equations the first and the second, you get a blue regions, which means that you have quite some uncertainty in terms of what are the channels and what's the, yeah, what's the contribution. You just know that there are maybe four channels and the second one contribute about point between point zero five to point two so there is quite some uncertainty. So once you put together the information for the flicker noise, you get this red. Now, predictions for what are the different values for the channels. And as you can see you can get a very significantly narrow and prediction or result for what's possible for the transmission values. So I will quickly summarize what's next for the flicker noise. And ongoing work. Thinking about thermometry. This was this flicker noise that I've described was activated by voltage or was a probe by voltage. One can also use a flicker nose for thermometry. One of the components one can probe more than material properties. And today I describe situation where we assume, again, based on other studies that electron electron repulsion effects are not significant, but one can design systems purposely with interesting electron, or many body effects in general, and use a flicker noise again to try to prove them. One of the messages that noise is actually diagnostic tool I think that was a general message from this conference. And I just wanted to that's the last point. Now to touch again is something that maybe goes back to general uncertainty relation or bounds and games that the auditions like but we can prove experimentally with the same platform. We studied from two years ago where we use the same platform before and here again from the experimental side and offer. And we looked at this thermodynamic uncertainty relation that was studied a lot in the classical stochastic thermodynamics, and we looked at it in the again in the quantum regime using this atomic scale junctions. And we wanted to see, as I've told you before one can actually fully violated. We wanted to see in the systems what happens. And it is that's the answer. Where is it. Oops, sorry. That's uncertainty relation. Thermodynamic uncertainty relation. It's plotted here. Okay without too many details in this system it satisfied, but we gave a prediction that when gamma which is an interaction effects in the system are strong enough, there is a possibility to actually break down and violate this result. So with that I would like to just acknowledge my group and my collaborators and again thank you very much for inviting me. Thank you for that for that very, very nice talk, I certainly agree with you that noise is not always a nuisance, we should all love noise. And with that, let me open up the floor for questions. There's a very clear talk. Actually, since some of the since we don't have the final speaker here. And I know that some of the earlier talks went went quickly if there are any follow up questions or comments or discussions that anyone would like to have related to any of the talks during this session. The floor is open. I may, if I can I would like to comment about the question actually regarding the previous, the talk of Matthew. So related to the point about the V model. Matthew responded to reply to that but I wanted to emphasize we were not claiming that this effect of coherence in the V model is a new effect we. It has been analyzed beautifully with previous work so that was a new element in our study. As Matthew mentioned, what we wanted indeed to it. We use this system as a case study to start to find out what different master equations predict for it. So we've, there's a beautiful literature indeed on the system about coherences at equilibrium out of equilibrium, and so on. Okay, thanks for clarifying that and I see we do have a question in the chat. Jose Daniel would you like to ask unmute yourself and ask that question. Okay, thank you very much. Yes, I would like to, to ask a professor finally in your in your results, which is the, the origin of the one over F square noise. No, of these three regimes in the noise. Yeah. Okay, so you're asking about one over F square. I know the one over F because in our system. The functional form was actually one over F not the one over F square. What I can tell you that they found was, I didn't highlight it enough. They test they consider two systems one with when it was just plain gold. Actually, there was no one over F component or it was extremely weak and the second system which I mentioned briefly, they peppered it with hydrogen molecules. And once they have these hydrogen molecules around. That's when they saw this one of the components so they. We didn't do more like atomic scale simulations that's actually something really interesting for me, but the pictures that we have in mind is that these hydrogen molecules are small enough to penetrate the gold. So they're sitting inside and they're mobile they can diffuse on the surface or inside. And that's where they can lead to indeed changes in the temporal changes in the scattering cross section for electrons. So that's for the system at least. Thank you. It is that we put there intentionally. Thanks for the question as well. Any other questions, questions or comments related to this talk or any of the other talks. Okay, if not, I suggest we let's thank collectively all of the speakers for very, very nice talks and thank everybody I thank everybody for attending this final session of the of the workshop and indeed for attending for attending all the other sessions as well. So I'm going to stop recording now.