Och så länge det är liv, det är bra för videorna. Det är inte officiellt. Jag gör det i Alphagique Media liv. Okej, här går vi. Det här är en publik DTNS-avgörande. En beskrivning i engelska kommer att följa. Välkommen till showen med dagliga teknologiska nyheter med Tom Merritt och Jester. Jag heter Carl och är en av flera exekutiva medproducenter och alltså en av Toms skefer. Det kan du också bli genom att tonera en dollar eller mer i månaden på Patreon.com. Det är dagliga teknologiska nyheter i september 10, 2015. Jag heter Tom Merritt och jag har varit med för länge. Vi har varit med i en liten och senare editare på det brittiska tekniska nätet på showen. Men i förhållande av kvinnorna, kvinnorna Victoria, som är den längsta regeringen på Monarch i brittisk historie, så tänkte vi att vi skulle ha dem tillbaka. Sänk vittorierna, men vi är här i USA och är bara normal. Alla djur har varit normalt. Jag har inte en stor snö på det. Ja, jag har tagit en fantastisk hatt, som vanligt. Vad är en djur? Jag måste säga att om du är en rörelse i en rörelsefamilj, om du tar de här länderna, så har hon ingen liv, inte en djur, men det är det. Jag tror att det är 67, är det rätt? Ja, men det är någon annan som är hos, effektivt. Okej. Jag kan inte tänka, jag vill inte tänka. Jag tror att det är mer pengar än problem. Även om hon inte har så mycket pengar. Åh, hon är inte så bäst. Jag tror att hon inte är plänt. Jag tror att det är en bra poäng. Okej, vi är här för att tala om teknologi, så vi ska gå in i några länder. Google's Payment System Android Pay rollar ut i USA. Android Pay kommer att arbeta i ställen som Best Buy, Walgreens, Subway, Whole Foods och Gamestop, med en NFC-nabelt Android-device, eller online, under djurna app-purchänsningar. Android Pay supports debit- och kreditkarten från Visa, Mastercard, Discover, Amex, och en number of bank credit unions. Google säger att det rollar ut Android Pay gradually over the next few days och expand the number of supported banks and stores over the next few months. Så vi har Apple Pay, Android Pay, supplanting Google Wallet. Google Wallet nu blir en sånna förhållande som square. Och så har vi Samsung Pay. Några av dem är verkligen färdiga här i USA. Är det nåt annat än i UK? Nej, jag tror att det är lite av en lotterie, som Apple Pay har shown här i USA. Vi har haft en rollout med alla andra, och jag är med i Barclays. Barclays vill starta sin e-system, så att de inte är i Apple Pay-systemet. Så att ingen av mina kartor jobbar i Apple Pay. Så jag tror att det finns lite konsumt och fatik, kanske, i några av de Pay-systemet. De som är i, älskar det. Men de som inte kan älskas, kan inte. Du vet inte vad det är. Jag kommer bara att tappa den i den.  Jag tror att vi har en av dem som arbetar på BTN. Han bor i Norwich, vilket är färdigt ut i sticks. Han har hittat en älskare i shoppen. Han har älskat Apple Pay för första dagen att det var utgång. Och hon har nästan älskat mig av witchcraft. Är det så bra? Det är skönt. The Verge reports that Office 2016 for Windows will launch on September 22nd. Folks, new features include real time editing by multiple people at once within your desktop apps anyway. News of new design themes. Microsoft will also release new tools for businesses to manage office updates. Just just something to tick off if you're a Windows office user. September 22nd, you're getting your update. Niantic Labs is working with the Pokemon company and Nintendo on Pokemon Go, a smartphone-based augmented reality game. And Gadget suspects Niantic, which makes the game Ingress, is probably using the location-based back-end of that game to allow players to catch, fight, and trade Pokemon in the real world. The game also includes a Bluetooth-enabled red and white Pokeball that flashes and vibrates when there are Pokemon nearby. Pokemon Go will be available for both Android and iOS in 2016. Thanks to DJ Sakane, by the way, for posting this on the Daily Tech News Show subreddit. I don't mean to speak for you, but I'm guessing that you and I are past the Pokemon generation, no? I can't wait. Are you going to collect them all or catch them all, or whatever? No, my boy would love this. He's going to be over the moon with that, definitely. My son and my daughter both got iPads, and they love that kind of stuff, so he's still into it. He makes sense of Pokemon, which to me just means that I need to refer him for mental health already, because he doesn't understand himself in the slides. I get the general, the way the game works and everything. I'm also really impressed by this video they show, where you've got Pokemon jumping out of the water and running down the road and fighting in Times Square. It's not going to look like that, though. I want to see what this thing is actually going to look like, and nothing was a real representation of the game, it seemed like. Yeah, no. I mean, the videos are always great. They always come with that not-actual in-game footage underneath, don't they say? Yeah. Facebook release statistics showing its active users in Africa grew 20% to 120 million in June. Nigeria has 15 million monthly active Facebook users. South Africa clocks in with 12 million in Kenya with four and a half million. Most of the users on the continent access Facebook on a mobile device, as you might guess. Really just another notch to say, yeah, Facebook's efforts in Africa seem to be paying off. Yeah, I think one of the things that people don't look at Africa as an advanced internet nation. I know it's not a nation. I know you said it was running for Miss World, didn't it, God? But no, the nations of Africa, they don't see it as internet advanced. And actually, they're probably running faster speeds than most of us are in the West, and they're probably running cheaper plans than most of us are in the West as well as. Yeah, it's a misunderstood marketplace, and there have been a few good articles about this recently. The next web had a great one today. TechCrunch had one yesterday. In fact, we're going to try to get Eric Olander on. He covers Africa for a financial network, and he's been on the show before, and it's very up to speed on what's going on there. Kenya, Nigeria, Ghana, a lot of those countries, you hear about maybe when there's some kind of trouble, but they're very, very fast growing markets, especially for technology right now. I want to see how many of those Nigerian accounts there were princes. See, that's the joke, right? That's what, I think that's Nigeria's benchmark, is when they get to the point where people stop thinking of princes when they think of Nigeria and start thinking of IT companies, they will know they have made it. When all those emails were actually written in America. Yeah, right, they weren't written in, none of them were written in Nigeria, I bet. Baidu launched a voice assistant for Android-based smartphones called DUER, D-U-E-R, apparently it means Secretary-DU, Baidu World Conference on Tuesday was where the announcement took place. The app will initially be limited to Chinese users ordering food and accessing on-demand services. Baidu plans to expand DUER's capability to include voice control for internet of things, control of smart devices in the home, and connections to healthcare providers and other service providers. I don't, do you use Siri or Cortana or any of these very often? I think I'm sort of missing out because I don't find them that useful. No, there was a phase probably during iOS 7 and the early days of iOS 8 where you'd actually put in Siri, can you do the following and you go, I'm sorry, I can't do that right now. And you're like, come on, you've got an internet connection, but it just flaked. But it's not like that at all now and Cortana knocks strips off Siri. I mean, I set a reminder on Siri. Siri, when I get home, remind me to do the following. It still hasn't reminded me and that was six months ago. Whereas Cortana actually allows you to say this is home whereas Siri wants a postcode and actually it thinks my house is round the corner from where I live. So it's convinced that I never go home. You know, I take it back. The one that I do use is the Amazon Echo and I really wish that it was available on my phone because there are times when I'm not in the room with my Amazon Echo when I'm like, oh, I want to add something to my shopping list or I want to make a to-do list note and I can't do it. I can't use it that way. So it's not quite as convenient as I would like. Now Amazon's made that APK or I'm sorry, the SDK available for people to use and put into more things, but I'd like to see Amazon come out. We don't have the Echo, but we do have the Fire TV and it's in terms of searching for stuff on Fire TV. It's excellent. So I guess it's using the same engine. I just want to point out though, we went through that entire story about Baidu Dewar and you didn't make the joke you were promising to make. I do do. Yeah, there we go. No, no, no. The interesting thing I thought with this is Baidu launched an assistant for Android-based smartphones. Well, Baidu's the largest search engine in China and it says it's limited to China to begin with. Well, that's a surprise. But actually I think it'd be interesting, jokes aside, to see what they actually achieve with this in Chinese and then see what's going to come across and how that's going to relate then to other search engines and what other search engines will pick up from it because I mean Google really would be stupid not to have a Chinese-speaking department who are monitoring this and seeing what happens. Well, yeah, and that's why you're seeing them wanting to get back into China with the Google Play Store because that is less problematic than putting search back into China and it's also where all the money is. They got dollar signs in their eyes and then they can get things like the Google voice assistant into China. But right now they can't, it's much more difficult. PC Mag reports that Periscope will now let users broadcast in landscape mode. Hooray, let your Ewoks dance.  Viewers can tilt the landscape as well or they can continue to stubbornly watch in portrait and it'll just be a smaller video.  Android users now have the option of private broadcasting, selecting audience from a list of followers. That private broadcasting will eventually come to iOS as well. Are you one of the folks who fights against portrait video? Well no, I mean I actually shot something in portrait video for a customer about six weeks ago because it was going on a TV screen. And a lot of the TV screen stuff that we get now in the underground or in transit stations for general public transport is a portrait piece of video on a screen that's turned on its side. So I think there's a very definite place for portrait video.  And why YouTube hasn't come up with a portrait player that fills the left hand side of the screen, yeah, he's beyond me because I would have thought that was fair. They have something that makes it less damaging now than it used to be but yeah, it's still an issue. It's on mobile, you can watch a portrait video on YouTube and it will look normal finally. But then you get people saying, well that's just encouraging people to bad behavior. But I'm glad to hear that you're defending the times when there are sensible reasons to use portrait video. Well, I use portrait video in my keying studio as well. So if I've got someone who wants to walk along the keying wall, I shoot it in portrait because that gives me a bigger picture to then shrink and put in against the key background. So I get more definition and I've got more flexibility with the size that I use. Effectively, if you shoot portrait video in a DSLR, you're effectively shooting 4K if you like of that person because it's double level. Yeah, I mean, there is no wrong aspect ratio. It's all about compatibility between recording and playback, right? And what your purpose is. Makes sense. Squash tacos submitted this next one on our subreddit, the NDTV article summarizing the latest Android distribution data from Google. Based on logging into the Play Store, Lollipop has risen to 21% share, good for third. Lollipop had just passed the 10% mark in June so it's perking along there. KitKat has fallen, but still maintains the top spot at 39.2% and Jelly Bean's three variants combined for second place at 31.8%. I don't know ever what to do with these numbers. They made it to the top of the subreddit and votes because people like to have arguments about fragmentation. But frankly, I don't think Android is super more fragmented than other operating systems have been in the past and it looks like we're actually getting good uptake for Lollipop here. I think there's too many people where they have absolutely no control over that. That's the real problem with those numbers. It's all based on the carriers. It's all based on what other people want you to do rather than what you want to do and what Google want you to do, which is why I find it really childish when Apple har fun about uptake of Android against iOS because there is no choice. Yeah. In Gadget reports on Qualcomm's new Snapdragon flight platform based on the Snapdragon 801 processor. It's for drones and Qualcomm's not done. They want a little of that drone money. Qualcomm is providing communications and camera tech on one board platform supports 4K video, a variety of sensors and quick charge, dedicated video encoding and dual image sensor support for depth sensing cameras. Fast company says unique, a Chinese company will be the first drone maker to use the platform. It sounds like good ideas from Qualcomm. It's always as usual in the implementation. Yeah, I mean, I think there's definite interest there probably for surveying tools and that kind of stuff. I know that there's a few of the energy providers here in the UK use a German firm that survey size of coal stocks and that kind of thing, and they'll do a surface area fly by and then do a depth fly by and the 3D on the 4K would be really useful for that. So I think the industrial uses would be massive for this most definitely. But I mean, the problem that we still got the civil level is people flying their drone too close to houses with cameras on it and getting shut down in Kentucky. Yeah, there's that. And well, just today Governor Jerry Brown here in California vetoed a bill that would have prevented you from flying your drone over private property, which would have been almost unenforceable since there's so much private property everywhere. But yeah, working out the details of that is a much harder challenge than providing good chip platforms. We'll see if Qualcomm gets an uptake here. Thanks to everybody who submit stories in our subreddit, dailytechnewshow.reddit.com. We appreciate it. It helps us put that whole line up together every day. So get in there and do some voting or at least do some submitting. And that is a look at the headlines. A very interesting article came out today. I think it was on TechCrunch where I saw it, yeah. About Flurry's app analytics report regarding apps versus TV viewing. Now this is US based, but the average US consumer spends 198 minutes a day in apps according to Flurry versus 168 minutes a day watching television. I don't know what they're, when they're working or sleeping or going to the bathroom. A lot of their time is spent in apps and TV. But I guess you can overlap. You can watch TV and use apps at the same time. They're not even counting browsers. Flurry said if we counted browser as an app, that app usage jumps to 220 minutes. And the other thing is that TV usage has been flat. It hasn't really been falling precipitously but it hasn't been rising either while app usage has been skyrocketing. And they think for the first time in 2015 in-app purchases will outperform mobile ads. And they're pointing a little bit to these new services like HBO Now and Showtime where you make in-app subscriptions to video services. I know it's a little different in the UK just because of the different landscape of how television works, Ewan. Nearly a third of page views from mobile and tablets though according to ComScore in the UK recently. Only 17% of UK teenagers 16 to 24 would miss their TV most if it was taken away. So it's not that far off. Do you think, here's my question. Do you think we're just spending more time doing lots of different things now that entertainment with phones and tablets and computers has provided more ways to divert our attention? I think there's a couple of things. So things like Netflix in terms of an app traction is high on the Apple TV and that kind of stuff. A lot of people watch that. We watch that an awful lot. We also watch an awful lot of stuff through Apple TV. And I don't know whether that's classed as an app you see now or because it's a digital cord cut platform so it perhaps falls within the criteria for this survey. I know for my own use at the office here if the cricket's on or the rugby's on or something like that and I wanna do work. I've got my iPad sat here playing away with the Sky Go application which I use religiously all over the place even at home and that for me has become a better way of watching Sky now because the kids are usually hogging the TV with their own stuff and it lets me to do it. And the other thing is as well I can pull my phone out and I can carry on watching the rugby whilst I go and do the shopping for the wife who's cooking dinner and says oh we're short of so and so I get the brownie points for getting the goods in and I can still keep up with the rugby. And you know what they were saying on the Apple announcement yesterday was apps are a better experience. I don't tend to agree. I feel like a cross platform experience where I get a little more flexibility like the web always ends up being a better experience but we're in an app world right now and what he's comparing it to when he says that on stage is comparing it to the ability to just turn on your television and watch either cable television or over the air. In that sense you do get a better user interface when you're talking about apps but I think it's beside the point. I don't think we're watching video on apps more because of the user interface. I think what we're doing is just you know spending more time taking control of our own entertainment and our own amusements. I think you've got the edge in me there because one of the other problems that we've got is app use over here because we don't get Hulu at all. We can't get any of the HBO ghost stuff yet. So we don't have that app opportunity that the Americans have to watch this. And I think if you've got the Sky Now app it's because you don't have Sky Television because if you've got Sky Television you'll use the Sky Go Gap as part of your package and I don't think the update for Sky Now and Sky Now as far as in my own mind I'm thinking it's the only app that really is out there apart from iPlayer app perhaps for TV and the catch-up apps and the ITV catch-up apps which I don't see people using that an awful lot because the catch-up stuff is usually very painful to try and watch with adverts and so on. Actually iPlayer is not too bad but I get what you're saying. How would you know? Because every once in a while I visit England obviously. You don't come for tea. Yeah, I should. It was rude of me and I apologize for that. The VPN wouldn't let me through to tea for some reason. But what about not TV apps though? I mean, I think that's the wider point I'm making is we hear print is dying, music is dying. Now television is on the rocks and really none of that is true. People are reading more than ever. They're watching more video than ever and they're playing with apps and they're playing games more than ever. They're listening to more music than ever. It's that we have more things and so when I say more things I'm not saying you have more apps to watch video necessarily. But even in the UK I'm sure it's true that you have more choices to entertain you besides just video. You can play games. You can do all kinds of things. Yeah, I mean with the Amazon Fire TV box that I've got, it's great. There's tons of games to play. There's the controller with that which is absolutely brilliant. There is a lot more things to do. Even going to the toilet in the morning before you go to work you can take some extra time with you. Yeah, you can read your feedly. I'm not saying that I know anyone who does that but it does help you keep up on the tech news that you're preparing for every day. We're just, our attention is pulled in more ways than ever and within the verticals, within music, within reading, within video we have more choices than we've ever had before. So I don't think that gets counted enough when people talk about the decline in music sales or the decline in advertising sales is that there's not an overall decline in consumption of media or even in attention to media or in creation of media, do you think? No, I think there's a lot of people taking an awful lot more in and to a certain degree without a little bit flotatious with the information rather than engaged in the information and a lot of it, you know, it's in one ear and out the other. Yeah, it's rather than being absorbed by us. Well, because we have, that is one of the difficulties that I think as a society we're probably working through is that when you have that much information to deal with it can be overwhelming, right? And so that's where portals what we're positioning themselves in the early 2000s and we've got apps that are trying to curate things for you and nobody's ever cracked that balance between I'm going to curate and give you what you want based on your own tastes and actually delivering so that you want to continue to use that. I have not found one app that I don't fully control the curation on like an RSS reader that works and gives me things that I didn't know I wanted in a satisfying way. Yeah, I know the suggestions of media in full stop whether it's written or whether it's TV and video is usually, it's kind of like you walk into a store and you say to the guy, here's what I absolutely want and you give him the brand name and you say this is what I want and he takes you over to something else and goes, yeah, but this is better. And you're like, no, I don't want you to tell me what you need to sell because the store owner wants you to get rid of these. I want you to give me the thing I just told you about and there's none of the apps do that. Nothing actually does it. It's all about pushing what they want you to get what they're going to get the most clicks from what they're going to get the most ad revenue from, etc. Yeah, absolutely. Well, that's where the money is, right? So it's a tension that has not been resolved yet. Let's get to our pick of the day. Funkaround, who apparently is British, wrote in with a pick of Radio Station BBC Six Music. You and I, I'd like to hear your opinion of this. Funkaround says it's the best station I've ever listened to and in my humble opinion, the best station there is. This digital internet only station serves up an incredibly eclectic mix of music. No other station in my knowledge can you hear Van Morrison, followed by Public Enemy, followed by Dof Punk, followed by Beck, followed by Kendrick Lamar. I hope a few members of the audience give it a listen and enjoy it. My advice to anyone checking out for the first time, have Shazam ready. You can thank me later. Yeah, Six, if you look at the BBC channels that push out, I think you know Radio One is aimed at a certain age and hits that certain age and if you're not in that certain age you see it as crass and Six is probably something which has got a little more of a broader spectrum perhaps for music. Radio Three is all classical. Radio Four is all discussion. So yeah, I can see that Six is the best out there on the BBC networks. Whether it's the best of all time or quite as good as they've alluded to, I'm looking around the room because I've got a couple of friends of me and they're kind of rolling their eyes a little bit at that statement. Well, I think... It's the best of the bad bunch. I think he's reacting to the clamor around Beats One when it launched and how wide a variety you would have on that and he's saying, hey, this existed already and they have a wide variety as well. I would say it's better than Beats One and my listening to Beats One so far. I think it's far more eclectic and far more diverse and it's appeal most definitely than Beats One is. But I mean, when it comes down to it, it's radio DJs talking about themselves which always kind of falls badly anyway. It was nice to hear Zane Lowe on the announcement telling people to turn their phones to mute. Yeah, that was quite nice and what they were playing there seemed pretty pleasant as well. Send your picks to us folks. Feedback at DailyTechNewsShow.com You can find my picks at DailyTechNewsShow.com slash picks. Got a few messages today. We got to talk about the Apple announcement reactions. Regarding the iPhone upgrade program Rich from Lovely Cleveland writes, I think this could be laying a very practical groundwork for Apple eventually offering their oft rumored MVNO. They're cutting off the carriers completely now from sales, subsidy and warranty service with the program getting consumers to associate with their carriers even less. For individuals and families completely bought into this program, the carrier is almost academic now leaving room for Apple to make a move. Wouldn't be surprised if we see a similar program from Google with Project Phi. And then Ryan says, haven't any of you bought jewelry? Rose gold is a golden copper alloy with a little bit of silver. It is very commonly used in jewelry and has been becoming more popular. The color used by the new iPhones very much resembles the look of rose gold and fits the name quite well. Stop making fun of rose gold. It seems to be his opinion there. So bucks move to one side, thank you. Yeah, yeah. You know, my wife is switching back from Android. Big news here to iPhone and she wants a rose gold one. Yeah, there's quite a few Twitter comments this morning and it seems to be a ladies color. I don't wish to categorize or stereotype but the tweet, anecdotally the tweets I saw this morning from people going, oh rose gold, we're predominantly ladies. What do you think of this idea of Apple sort of secretly trying to capture away the carrier market from the carriers that Rich put forth there? Yeah, I think there was more than one instance last night in the keynote where Apple had tried to play ball with the content creators and the carriers and all that kind of stuff and they dragged their heels and they'd stuck in the mud and Apple last night delivered a kind of FU to them in terms of the way that they looked at. As you said, they've absolutely cut the carriers out now. Carriers be damned. You can provide an airways and nothing else because you get no more subsidies, you get nothing from us that helps you. So you either provide the airways and that's it or nothing at all. And I think also if you look at the apps comment that they made with the Apple TV, that was because they couldn't curate their own Netflix like streaming services that people could buy into. So therefore they said, right, stuff here, that's it and they cut people off. And I think those markets are gonna feel the pinch most definitely in the next couple of years. And Apple's too big to mess with. It's like a wasp stinging a bear and expecting the bear to run. It ain't gonna happen. They've got some leverage over people and it just keeps getting bigger. Overall, what was your summation of the announcements yesterday? I think it was a game of two owls, mate, to quote Jimmy Groves. The first half, they wired me. I thought Christ, I spent the last month working hard so I could just give it all to Apple.  The 3D force touchy type thing, I thought they made more of that than there really was to it. Other apps have been dealing with long touch or prolonged touch secondary menus for quite a while. That's gonna, developers are gonna take that and run with it. And it was too long again, two and a half hours, too much time to sit and watch. My wife had left me tea to stew on the table. It was, I wasn't gonna be back at half seven like I normally am. They've got to whip that down cause people switch off after about an hour and a half. I thought they did a really good first half job, second half, no, you lost me, sorry. Well, it felt like they took their October announcement and pushed it into this one and that's why it was two hours. We would normally get an hour in September, an hour in October about iPads and they just mushed them together. So I don't expect to get another announcement out of Apple for the rest of the year. The dancing dog did it for me. You know the kind of like happy days jump in the shark thing. I think the dancing dog was Apple's jump in the shark. That did it for me. Dancing the dog with Tim Cook. D-dog wrote in with a little more info on Instagram's new advertising system that we mentioned yesterday. The targeting he says will be more detailed now and D-dog writes in terms of quality expected to be similar to what we see now on Facebook. Previously ads on Instagram had to be pre-approved which was doable when ads were limited. Now it'll follow a similar process to what exists on Facebook. Images for advertising on Facebook are restricted to 20% text and the company is constantly reminding advertisers of preserving a certain style when advertising on Instagram. Additionally, like Facebook videos will still be tapped for sound despite being autoplay. So we're not going to see as nicely curated advertisements in Instagram as we used to. Does that bother you at all, Yun? Yeah, I think the online video market has kind of lost its soul a little bit with the advertising stuff. There's an awful lot of overlay advertising in videos now where you see the X but actually there's another transparent ad laid over the top that you end up clicking positively which falls you into it. I think the perfect advertisement that there was in Google, a YouTube brother, was the five second that you could skip and everyone would get, oh yeah, but everyone would skip in the ads.  Good adverts you watched. So there's the quality control if you like and we just talked about this on The Big Show. There's no way I'm sitting down watching a minute and a half and advertising to see a 30 second clip about the Grand Prix or about the football or about the rugby or about the American football and just say I stuff it, not having it, go on. When you're flipping through Instagram, though, is it going to bug you if there's some gaudy ad thing in your stream? Yeah, I'll just move on. I think you just hit in the tab to close it straight away. I don't think there's any positive to it at all. I think advertising, well maybe advertising is at that point now where this is a painful thing that it's got to go through. It's adolescence perhaps and it'll come out the other side and be a bit more mature about the way it deals with its consumers. Internet advertising for sure. Yeah, I think you're right. James The Aircraft Mechanic in Lake Charles, Louisiana said, wanted to weigh in on your email from Tuesday regarding using the smartwatch to get around phone restrictions. I work on military surveillance aircraft. Hopefully that's sufficiently vague. Around here, we also have strict phone restrictions and I hadn't thought of a smartwatch as a way to get around this. I have to listen back to hear exactly what model he was using. It was the gear s by the way. But another brilliant workaround from the DTS communities as James. Well, there you go. Yeah, and a lot of people wrote in and said, hey, it's the camera in the phone is often the problem or just, you know, some some places of work aren't necessarily particularly finicky about security with the phone, but they just don't want people distracted. So they make them leave their phones, but they aren't going to make them leave their watches. I love the fact that he's put down surveillance surveillance aircraft. Hopefully that's vague enough and then he puts his address down. And the address that he's put down clearly means he's you too. Yeah, well, you know, there are all kinds of things going on over there in that corner of the world. And then Allison Sheridan wrote in and pointed out there's a mode on Roku you can turn on that if you hit the 32nd back button, it turns on subtitles temporarily when it replays. She says Siri is cooler, of course, but Roku can already do that. And I'm pretty sure voice search on the other devices requires a special remote. We've been going back and forth about this. Fire TV, if you buy the box, gives you the remote with the microphone in it. It doesn't if you buy the dongle. You have to buy that remote separately if you buy the dongle. I think the current Roku 3 gives you the voice activated remote, but not the older Roku 3s if I have this right. So it's again, nothing in that Apple announcement was new. There was nothing that they announced that Apple is the first one to do, but that's always the way it is. Apple's position is always, we're not the first to do it, but we're the best to do it. You can decide whether you agree with them or not, but it's funny like for more than 10 years now you and every time there's an Apple announcement, somebody comes out and points out all the things that other people have done first. And it's like, yeah, of course, that's gonna happen every time. I love the fact they invented the remote last night. That was awesome, I never saw that coming. Yeah, and apparently works from the things I've read. I can't wait to try that actually, see if it actually lives up to the hype. But that's it for this episode of Daily Tech News Show. Folks, if you haven't checked out the British Tech Network, it's just getting bigger and better all the time. Go to britishtechnetwork.com, follow you in on Twitter to find out what's happened over there, twitter.com slash you in ranken, that's E-W-E-N-R-A-N-K-I-N.  We're just doing a great time. I mean none of us are making it.  We're not ready to buy CBS or anything yet, so. Oh, believe me, I'm not ready to buy CBS. I'm ready to buy groceries. I'm very happy about that, yeah. No, we just do it for a lot of fun. We got several shows on there. We got some fantastic people in the back room helping us out. We just started streaming HTML5 rather than just Flash all the time, which is great. That's working smoothly, thanks to Anders, he's done that. We've got a Hoya tie up with the guys there and they've been helping us out with optics and stuff for the studio. And that's really been great. And also, we just got new shows. We've got Lee Tarshow with Lee Peterson where he takes you through how to do the backing track, how to do the solo for a guitar each week in a lesson. And we've just got great people around us. It's really nice time at the moment. Real renaissance at the BTA. And you need to come on as well. We haven't seen you in ages, do you? I know, man. I'm sorry. I've just overcommitted this entire year. I will be back, though, I promise. Are you less popular? Or just less busy. But folks, go check it out, man. There's some good stuff, BritishTechNetwork.com. And thanks to the folks who let me buy groceries, the bosses and the patrons and the folks who keep the show going, you mean the world to us. If you can support the show, if you get some value out of the show and you want to give some value back, go to patreon.com slash ace detect. Or if you can't give on a regular basis, you can use PayPal to give once just a couple of bucks in the tip jar or maybe buy a mug at dailytechnewshow.com slash store. All those links are at dailytechnewshow.com slash support. Jenny Marlin, chatroom, wants to specify what's your add-ons. What's the CBS buying level in Patreon? So you've got a goal there now. That's a good idea. Put that on. Yeah, I should put the non-basic meal items, you know, the chocolates and such as an extra one. Our email address is feedback at dailytechnewshow.com. You can give us a call 51259 daily. Listen to the show live Monday through Friday at 4.30 Eastern at alphageekradio.com and visit our website dailytechnewshow.com. We'll be back tomorrow with Natalie Morris and Len Peralta. Talk to you then. This show is part of the Frogpants Network. Get more at frogpants.com. I hope you have enjoyed this program. Ah, a great show as always, man. Thanks, buddy. That was really nice. Yeah, that was good stuff. With the coal bear level. The whole new battery and goal levels. Yeah, the CVS level for my suit of fed. You got a coal, dude. Yeah, a little bit. At least you turned on your splutter in a bit. A little bit post dragon con. Ridiculousness. Then you do the fist bump, you should cancel. Yeah, a little too often. Stopped eating my kale. That's what happened. So what should we call this? I have some ideas. Do you? We've got Periscope Widen's Expectations. That's pretty good, Bioco. I like that. It's an app, app, app, app world. Which is great because it's about the actual discussion title. Gentrafragamentation. Let's see. Too many companions, which has the dual doctor who benefit. Landscape ho as viewed through Periscope. That could leave Rose Gold alone. Nice. Yeah, I was surprised. Eileen doesn't usually like pink, but she said she likes it because it's the only color. Like everything else is so muted. And it's Rose, love. Yeah, well, middle name's Rose. That's subliminal marketing from Apple. All the people who have got middle name Rose. Are all going to buy that phone or that watch. It's just pink. Middle name Rose, there's your show title. Fred had app-tight issues. Oh, dear. Rose. There's also periscopes up and down. Ah, right. Either way, 90 or 180. Well, I like Periscope widens expectations, but I get that it's an app, app, app world fits the title. So I don't know, do you either? Maybe they take 30 more seconds to vote on it. All right, showbot.tv, get in there and vote. Do it. I'm still levelating. There's still time. All right. 30 seconds? How many seconds? Sure, 40 seconds to catch up so that they can actually hear it. Followed by 30 seconds to vote. The only thing we had was when we were running Flash, we had a two second delay to the world on the server. And it was awesome because the chat room was virtually running in real time by the time they first started. Oh, wow, that's amazing. But now we've gone to HTML5 because of the software, we're back to 30 seconds. It's not horrific, but... That will get better though. No, it's going to be a while, but that will eventually be conquered. Yeah, there was times we were at 45 seconds to move a minute and a half at times on YouTube and Livestream. Yeah. Big vote for Hoyer in the chat room. Really? Thanks for all the filters, he says. They're making glasses now. We have used it to a mod, mod, mod, mod world before, as Dark Redeemer points out. Så, I don't know what that means. Apparently we're periscoping the show at the moment. Oh, good. Excellent, in portrait. Even better. No, you can't change it over once you've started, mate, that's it. I don't know, Jenny, can we just go with it's a nap-ap-ap-ap world then? I say so, there's never too many times to reference that movie. Let's get real. Fine, done. I did different titles on YouTube than I did on the podcast yesterday, it was insanity. What happened? I left the original Apple title on the YouTube video, and then I used a different title on the podcast. Wow, that is all universal. AB testing. Yeah. All right, I'm exporting now. It's an app-ap-ap world, showbinder, if you need to know. That's what has been picked. Yerp. That's pretty late over there, Leuen, if you need to go. No, no, no. If you want to get rid of me, that's fine. No, no, no. Not at all. What do you do? So, how are you fixed for a macho, etc.? You're on Fridays at 7, right? Fridays at 7 a.m. for you. Yeah, you know what? Oktober, my schedule frees up. So like, oktober, yeah, this year, good question though. From October 9th, that Friday on, one of those could work. Okay. I should get to it, would you get yourself an email, so let's do that. Okay, yeah, yeah. Let's do it. Let's make it happen. Yeah. Too many cooks. You said it, now it's back in my head. I'm sorry. What is your problem? I know. I'm an evil man. Ah, man, you're just saying about us killing it. You are absolutely rockin' and rollin' at the moment with this and core killers and... Things are going. Yeah. Oh, it's only 10.07 p.m., so those batteries. That's when I go to sleep. Mm-hmm, especially in this heat, it's passed out at 9.30 the last two days. I mean, yeah, it must be hot as well if you guys have complained about the heat, because the climate is a little bit more than what I mean. We had a really nice day today, but it's September air, so it's cool and crisp, and it's a nice day. Oh, that sounds great. 100 degrees yesterday. Oh, man. Now, at the moment, it's the kind of perfect weather. If you get a really nice day during the day, but it gets cooler at night, it's to get the log burner going out in the garden and pull on a fleece or something like that.  It's a good character. Get a nice warm cider. Yeah. And you've got the precipitation is low as well now in September, whereas it's higher in April, and the winds are up in April, so it's a really nice time. That sounds lovely. And you get clear skies as well, you can get some, because you're getting a slightly earlier night, so you can drag the telescope out at 8.30 instead of 11 o'clock. Mm-hmm. You've been doing that? Oh yeah, I've got a dobsonian that's 150 millimetres. It's great. Nice. We had the four millions of Jupiter on about three months ago, and it was awesome. Great deal. We should, because you know a whole lot about photography, my friend. I hope so. Yeah, and we should do a photography episode. Oh, I'm in. Yeah. Well, if you do a monthly one, then you can cover that. I used to do the photo show on my own, but it's like a day to put it together. And I couldn't afford effectively one and a half days a week to just put out a photography podcast. I need to do a monthly show, most definitely. So yeah, if you want to do like one day a month of photo, then I'll gather some news stories together with you. Let's kick stuff around. I feel like we could put together something good, even if it's not always like every month. You know, there's always, there's always photo news and I'm, and I'm photo dumb. Well, Canon dropped a 250 megapixel camera. Yeah, I saw that. I mean, that's, that's going to be scientific and commercial use, because there's no way that's going to hit. Right. It's industrial stuff, right? Yeah. Yeah.  Sorry. Sorry, I didn't mean to bring it up. Exactly. It's one of those things. It's like you mentioned it and it's like all I take is abuse for the next company. Yeah. People forgot all about it till you remind them. All right. Let's see. I think I've got this. He's canon biased. Yeah. I am canon. Well, I am canon biased. And if you go back three years, I'd have ditched all the canons through a Nikon and a Harby, but I'm just too bought into the lenses. That's the trouble. I got 25, 30 grams worth of lenses. That's the great issue with cameras. It's kind of like the mafia once you buy into a system, unless you can find someone to offload it to and get maybe 80% of what you put into it. I hate to say it, but you're kind of stuck with it. Yeah, totally.  Which one is it the Sony A? One that everyone loves, but all the Sony glasses, like twice as expensive as canon stuff. But you can get the adapters, but that kind of just adds weight. But there's a lot of the Sony sifters. Is it some of the Sony sifters, Micro Four Thirds as well? No, all Sony is the girls now. I think they finally ditched the Alpha, wherever the Alpha mount was, and settled on the E-mount. And then they have the full frame. Guy asked me the other day about, you know, I need to buy DSLR, what should I buy? And I said Micro Four Thirds all through now. It's not canon and Nikon, just get the stuff. You can get tons of stuff for it. It's better writing. There we go. I've got our second guest, Roger. I'll just say, so photos are interesting, and then you guys talk. Well, no, it's like the issue with Micro Four Thirds, though, is that it's almost... I hate to use this word, but it's almost bipolar, because it's so dominated by Olympus and Panasonic at this point, that there really hasn't been kind of a cohesive focus on developing like an actual, you know, comparable sensor that Sony's been making for everyone, and they're all cool, including Nikon. Right? They're making the sensor for... Well, that's what it is. Sorry, that's my kid. For Nikon's line-up. He's very upset about the sensors. I mean, a lot of people overspeck what they want to shoot, in terms of the camera purchase that they make. I guess something because it's a higher end. And actually, even as a pro, I wouldn't use some stuff at the higher end. Everyone's raving about 4K. Most of the stuff I'm making video gets shown on a crappy projector in a boardroom. So what the hell do I need 4K for? I think that's the difference with pros and amateurs, is they'll buy overspeck stuff rather than what they actually need for what they actually shoot. I'm actually really drawn. Less of the Sony and more of the Panasonic is the hybrid DSLR video camera. Play with the GH4GH. All right. Excuse me. Yeah, that's all right. All right, well, I'm out of the post anyway, so we should probably end this. But thank you again, Ewan. No, I'll see you again soon. Absolutely. Talk to you all later, folks.


So at the time when Poincare came to this mathematical world, mechanics was already a kind of mathematical method of mechanics were well formulated. So the work of these great people, Newton, Lagrange, Hamilton, Leibniz, there's a very kind of perfectly formulated mathematical foundation of mechanics. And essentially, the efforts of mathematician and physicist in this era were directly to solving some concrete system, some finding for concrete cases of integrability of classical mechanical system. And equation of mechanics, when you write this in either system of first order equation as a vector field, have this special form which was written by Hamilton called Hamilton canonical equation. And just written in this form, they have some special qualitative property. And of course, these people like Jacobi somehow knew this, but probably Poincare was the first one who kind of explicitly realized that, for instance, if you have a system with two degree of freedom and a conservative system and you have a level set, which is three dimensional, and then you have this flow on this level set of constant energy, then area of the transfer slice preserved by this flow. So also, I'm sure that he knew that the same property holds in high dimensions that this Hamiltonian flow preserve what is called, at that time, Poincare integral invariant, but then when this theory of differential form were developed, now known as symplectic form, and so he knew that these maps are preserving the symplectic structure. And I think that this kind of the Poincare had this dream that the Hamiltonian system should have this mechanical differential equation coming from mechanics should have special qualitative property just because of their form. Of course, some special maybe boundary condition, but essentially just these properties that have this form, for instance, the property of preservation of area of symplectic form, have an extremely strong qualitative property, for instance, for the problem of existence of periodic orbit. So Poincare, of course, was applied mathematicians. So at that time, just thinking of periodic orbit, though some classical mathematicians also that before him also did it, but it probably was something which one needed all the time kind of prove that it's important. Otherwise, he wouldn't get this funding from some agency, I don't know, whatever. But in every case, he just, for instance, this quote which already Arnold gave it, he just needed to somehow approve, have some kind of explanation why he want to find periodic orbit because they from his point of view there was this window in this otherwise chaotic world of dynamical system. So we already had this in this conference to talk concerning last geometric theory of Poincare. So unfortunately, I cannot avoid it, and I have to say something about this because that's really where the whole symplectic topology starts. So this theorem, which as was already explained early, kind of came to Poincare when he needed the theorem because he really wanted to get some results about periodic orbit in the restricted three-body problem. But nevertheless, he realized that there is just purely, because in the spirit of what I said before, that there is a purely geometric question about area-preserving map and about the fixed point, which he needed to prove and to find out. And so as it was already said, it concerns the area-preserving transformation of an annulus when the boundary component are rotated in opposite direction. But I should say that when you say that boundary component rotate in opposite direction, this is a little bit ambiguous thing because what does it mean? It's rotated, for instance, by pi. It's rotated counterclockwise or clockwise. So just an appropriate way of thinking about this, that instead of transformation of annulus, you look at the periodic transformation of the strip. So you just lift it to the cover of this annulus. And then there is this already unambiguous means what it means. So you can choose a covering map just on the one boundary. It's a shift in one direction, another in another direction. And say, if you take a kind of some vertical slice, then its image will be something like this. So Poincaré paper actually starts with some kind of sketch of the proof of the theorem, which I think also could be given by Jacobi or before that because he also knew such type of argument. And what I will explain today, this proof with some epsilon addition, in fact, really could be made to the proof, not only of this one, but also of high dimensional result. So this was a really right start. But then at some point, he just a little bit turned in the wrong direction. And that's why he couldn't prove it. And then it was things became even worse after Bergdorf proved the theorem. So let me explain this argument. So let's just assume that our transformation is small. So if our transformation is small and we look, so first of all, it's a transformation of the strip. But let's extend it as a transformation of the whole plane just by defining it as just translation by some constant c upstairs and minus c downstairs. So this is a transformation of the plane. And let's look at the graph of the transformation, which sit in the four-dimensional space. And like always used to kind of mechanics. And actually, you denote coordinates p, small pq, and the image p capital and q capital. And then what I want to do, if it's small, then it's also graphical with respect to coordinates q p capital. So you can consider this kind of splitting. Yeah, sorry, you should stop there. Oh, sorry. OK. That's a great idea. OK. So you have a splitting of these coordinates q p capital and pq capital, not like pq and p capital, q capital, but in these coordinates. And it's still graphical in this coordinate. OK, so suppose you can express this graph as explicitly in this coordinate. And then because dp, dq, it's area preserving, dp, dq is equal to dp capital, dq capital. And this means that form pdq plus qdp, this form is exact, is closed. But in the collision space, it means that it's exact. So it's a d of some h. And six points are points where p small equal pp capital q and q small equal q capital are therefore zeros of this differential form. You make a differential form with the coefficient of differences. So you get this form p minus pdq plus q minus qdp capital. And this is the differential of this function. So what is good that this function is periodic with respect to q variable? Because it's clear that the coefficients are themselves periodic, it's periodic transformation. And therefore, when you integrate periodic functions, you get kind of a covariant function after a period it's shaped by some constant. But what you observe that at infinity, this function is equal to cp because of our condition, it's just equal constant on plus infinity equal constant plus constant times p and other minus constant times p. And there we see that it's periodic in q. And therefore, it's everywhere periodic. This constant has to be 0. So therefore, this function is periodic with respect to q. And at p infinity, it looks like this. It's kind of the case this direction and the case this direction. And so clearly, you have a function periodic in q variable and kind of behaving this way. This function must have some critical point. And you can prove it just taking a minimax argument, this thing. So this will be, and the critical point are exactly 0, the differential. And hence, they are fixed point of our transformation. This is precisely what is written in Poincare on the first page of his paper. So, but then kind of what Poincare decided. Well, but this is, of course, applicable. It has very restrictive, restricted applicability because, well, when it's graphical, it's essentially that mean that our transformation, just every vertical slice, can look like this. But if you think, then it can be something like this. So it could be extremely complicated. And so therefore, this somehow forced Poincare in this way of thinking that now you have to kind of unwind this extremely complicated picture. So he started to consider that one special case after another. He considered many, many of them. But still they kind of kept growing and he couldn't consider all of them. So this was a kind of, this was the wrong term in his argument. So, but as I said, I'll just a little bit later like explain how he could done it correctly and kind of, and then the progress would be like 60 years or 70 years faster. So this theorem was proven, as was already told by George Birgolf, and it's of course great that he proved it. But he gave a very clever proof. And clever proof is never good because if it's a clever proof, it's kind of to use some trick and somehow it didn't go anywhere. So although I should say that Birgolf, in fact, understood at least the kind of I read in his book on dynamical system, he said there is some paragraph where he understood that this fixed point theorem is, in fact, has a high dimensional generalization as a properties of a symplectic map. So I would say that he formulated Arnold's conjecture but not really explicitly. So I can suspect that Bonkare also knew this because he kind of said, OK. But then came Arnold in 1965. And this is, I think, Arnold in 1977, so a little bit later. And he formulated this series of conjecture, which essentially just stated what was written on the first, in the proper form, what was written on the first page of Bonkare theorem that where he explicitly related this question about fixed point with critical point of some function. And then Arnold said that should be true in general. Somehow this question about periodic orbit of Hamiltonian system, it's some question about question kind of governed by property of critical functions, a critical point of function. For instance, more theory or as we, in fact, heard in the talk of David Gabbay yesterday that the more theory was invented by Bonkare, so it should be called Bonkare theorem. OK, so in particular kind of one particular question which Arnold formulated, it was a question kind of the first generalization of Bonkare theorem to the other surfaces, for the case of torus. So he said, OK, so if you have a transformation of two torus, then it should have an area preserving. Then it should have, well, in non-degenerate case, at least four points, or in general case, at least three points. And of course, this cannot be true just for anything. The Bonkare had this twist condition kind of ensuring this. And Arnold kind of formulated it as a condition of preservation of center of mass. So I'll say in a second what does it mean. So this condition of preservation of mass kind of known under many, many names. So it just means that if you take any curve on the torus and look at its image, then the algebraic area between this curve and its image equal to 0. So why it's the center of mass? Because if you go to covering, you can take a domain and take its image in the center of mass of this domain remain in the same place. And this is a kind of what's proven to be equivalent to many other quotations. So this is actually, this is also called flux. This homomorphism associated with every loop of this area is called flux. So you can say the flux 0. And Baniaga proved that it's exactly the same. The differmorphism is in the commutator of the group of area preserving differmorphism as a topic to identity and equivalently that you can just connect f with identity by Hamiltonian flow. So one correct theorem follows from Arnold's conjecture about torus because you see if you have a transformation of annulus twist one. So you can just by this doubling trick, you can make a transformation of the torus and you can kind of insert inside some band where you can compensate area just inserting that it would be area is equal to 0. So it's just generally generalization of Poincare theorem. So I kind of I spent many, many years in 70s trying to prove this thing. And finally, I proved it in 79. And but in fact, kind of now going back to what I actually proved, I proved some kind of version of Broward translation theorem, which I didn't know at the time. And it essentially just said that if you have any differmorphism of torus without fixed points, then on this torus, you can always find some embedded homotopically non-trivial curve such that it's kind of disjoint with this image. And then, of course, this contradicts to this preservation of mass condition for area preserving thing. And this is Broward. It's not me. So let me kind of I need to a little bit more terminology. Let me talk slightly a few minutes about Lagrangian sub-manifold. So we already spoke about symplectic form. So symplectic form in two-dimensional space is just a form which associated with every pair of vectors, some of its area of projection to all coordinate plane Q1, P1. And this is a skew symmetric form. And it has a some isotropic sub-manifold. Maximum dimensional, which has a half dimensional, is called Lagrangian. And if you restrict symplectic form to Lagrangian, then it's automatically because d of this, then it's a 0. And therefore, form PDQ, which is a preimage of symplectic form, when you restrict it to Lagrangian, is closed. And if it's exact, then this Lagrangian manifold is called exact Lagrangian sub-manifold. So for instance, if you take a circle in the plane, this circle in the plane is not exactly Lagrangian sub-manifold because this form is a restricted form and just d-heater form on this one. So what you need is that when you integrate form PDQ, which give you enclosed area, then you get 0. So therefore, on the plane to get exactly Lagrangian manifold, you're kind of forced to have self-intersection form. And you'll see that this is, in fact, general property. So we already encountered in proof of Foncare, we encountered two main examples of Lagrangian manifold. Namely, if you have an area preserving, so this graph of this area preserving map in this kind of space where I consider this symplectic form is this precisely dp d2 plus dq dp. Turns out to be Lagrangian, and this was the main thing which we used. And another thing which we used is that with respect to different splitting in the two Lagrangian coordinate plane, if it's graphical, then it's automatically graph of differential of some function. So in this time, in the 60s and 70s, when Arnold formulated his conjectures, it was completely unclear whether this should be true or not. So in particular, though it was, for instance, Foncare theorem was proven, so you could say something was proven. And well, I later proved that are not theorem for torus and other surfaces. But this very much, both Berghof proof and my proof, were extremely two-dimensional. And so it could be just some kind of phenomena from two-dimensional topology rather than something symplectic. And Gromov, at that time, formulated a proof of the following symplectic alternative. So you see, when you have a symplectic transformation, then symplectic transformation also preserves volume. So this, in fact, was known like Liouville proved that Hamiltonian flow preserved volume. The phase flow of Hamiltonian is preserved volume. And Foncare understood it preserved more than that. It preserved the symplectic form. And so the group of transformations which preserve symplectic form is, of course, inside the group of those preserved volume. And, of course, preservation of volume is C0 property because it can formulate as a major preserving property. And Gromov just asked, what is the C0 closure of the group of symplectic defiomorphism in the group of all volume preserving transformation? And he proved that could be only two answers. Either it's a whole group or it's just itself. There's nothing intermediate. And so this is just kind of dramatic kind of alternative. Either symplectic topology exists or it does not exist at all. So that means that then kind of nothing true because for volume preserving transformation in high dimension, you can prove there is no fixed point properties. And because fixed point is something C0 kind of question, that means that all our null conjecture, all similar questions are wrong. So at the time, in fact, most of evidence was pointing that it should be wrong. So Gromov himself proved a lot of kind of result, very much close to this one. For instance, I will not go explain you all, but just mention just one small thing. So as we've seen, there's this kind of essence of all this symplectic rigidity is some question about Lagrangian embedding. Because for instance, fixed point theorem is again something about intersection of this Lagrangian diagonal with Lagrangian graph is diagonal of two Lagrangian manifold. And so kind of related question about Lagrangian embeddings of possibility of make Lagrangian embeddings of some manifold into symplectic manifold. And for instance, what Gromov proved that if you look at epsilon Lagrangian embedding, so that means that if you just consider maps which Lagrangian up to some angle epsilon, deviate more and more, then you have a kind of complete freedom you can extremely easy to construct such thing. And so you just pass to the limit with epsilon goes to zero, that's again proof of everything. So was there even kind of more motivating? So I said that in the beginning of 70s, I was like one week I was proving symplectic rigidity and next I proved that it's actually just opposite. So it was extremely difficult to decide. So another interpretation of this question of Gromov alternative is that in symplectic topology, all non-trivial question are tightly related. Like if you have any kind of progress in one of them, kind of non-trivial, then it's immediately give you some progress in other. So let me give you some example. So here is some basic question. So like you question about extension of symplectic structure. So you have a boundary of the ball and near the boundary of the ball, you have a symplectic structure given and you're asking is it possible to extend it to the ball? There are some obvious obstruction. For instance, the symplectic form give you some almost complex structure you want to be extendable. And then you also, symplectic form on the boundary via stock theorem remember what should be volume of symplectic form inside, so therefore it should be positive. So this is just only two non-obstructions and you ask is this obstruction sufficient or not? So a similar very related question. You have a two symplectic structure. For instance, you have on the ball, you have a symplectic structure which is on the boundary standard. And you're asking and supposing again formally it's by the almost complex structure or as a non-cloth non-degenerate form you can deform one to another. Some kind of homotopical conditionment. Is it true that they are in fact the same? They are isotopic? Or so as I already say this Lagrangian intersection principle is it true or not? That like intersection of Lagrangian is governed by Morse theory rather than just homological intersection theory. Or there's kind of partial question of this are there exact embedded Lagrangian in some manifold in symplectic space? As we see here in R2, they do not exist. Can we find exact Lagrangian torus in R4? So, well, so then kind of some revolution happened and kind of many great results were proven. So Daniel Benneken proved, well, he proved a lot of great results but one what I want to quote if he particularly shows that not every contact is different morphism in dimension three and why contact has to do with the symplectic I'll say in a second later. It can be approximated by any, not every different morphism can be approximated by contact once, so it's kind of analog of the Gromov alternative in contact case. So, and then Conley-Sander proved our null conduction for torus of any dimension. And so these both two result imply rigid resolution Gromov alternative because if they prove something non-trivial and they say any non-trivial result would imply this. But probably at least one of these people in this audience probably they didn't know about Gromov alternative so therefore they didn't prove it. Okay, so what I just want to do now as I promised I will prove our null conjecture for the torus and well I will do it only in two dimensional case but in fact my proof will be perfectly kind of good in general case and this proof as you'll see is just essentially the same proof which is given by Poincare on the first page of his paper but it just required one kind of epsilon addition and this epsilon addition required at least 70 years to kind of to be realized. And so this is some kind of the argument we'll explain it some kind of adaptation by Gromov and myself of Mark Chaperon finite dimensional version of Conley-Sander's proof but you don't need to know neither of them to understand what I said. That I said just Poincare argument just I'll just repeat it with few more words and that's it. So okay, so I will be proving just Poincare fixed point theorem for the torus for the two dimensional torus. So again as before I lift everything to R2. So you have a like Z2 periodic, Z plus Z periodic transformation on the plane and it's preserved this center of gravity or center of mass and you'll see how it play around. So again let's first think that it's small. If it's small then I repeat word by word Poincare argument. So I just again I take a graph and there's this graph is can be expressed in this with respect to the splitting PQ capital QP capital kind of graphically and then again you have this property which imply that this form is closed therefore exact and again like before when you take this function H minus PQ capital by the same argument by Poincare argument critical point of this function are fixed point of F and what we can easily check that this function is periodic and this is exactly periodicity of this function is where I use the conservation of mass property because again other was it would be kind of not periodic but just a Q variant and to prove that this constant are equal to zero you need this condition. Okay so now let's consider general case and now this additional fantastic idea that we have a transformation which is not close to identity. It's still a composition and it's an answer either topic to one which is close to identity. Then it is composition of those which are close to identity. So this is a I think well I think Poincare could realize this probably. Okay so then we have a N map. So you presented F as this product and let me just I'll give you this argument when we have two of them. If you have more it's just exactly the same you have to just write this thing. Okay so now you have two graphs of F1 and F2 and now in this eight dimensional space I consider product of these two graphs. So notice then you take a product of two graphs of small diffeomorphism. It's again some kind of surface in this space which is close to the diagonal there in this eight dimensional space. So this product of graph is given by product of this equation just given by this four equation. And exactly for each of them you have a Poincare argument which say that you have this PI DQI plus QI capital DPI capital R differential and if you oh sorry this isn't should be H not F. And if you just correct them by this quadratic function that they are the two periodic. Now let's take a G is equal sum of these two functions. So now you use the following set theory. So you say okay so you have a product of two maps. You have a map, one map F1 and you have another map. So this is a map F1 and you have another map F2 of something to something. So what, so now we're looking at composition. You have a graph of this map and a graph of that map and we're looking at composition of this map. What are fixed point of the composition? So fixed point, how to find fixed point?  Then you need to take the same point here take its image and then you say that this point is the same as this point, right? So let's just write this property. Write this property. So fixed point of F in one to one correspondence with this intersection of the graph with this condition P2 equal P1. So this is precisely two conditions which express that this point is equal to this point and this point is equal to this point. That's what I wrote. And again, this just mean that this fixed point are in one to one correspondence with zeros of this one form. And this one form is a differential of this function G which is periodic with respect to all variable and plus some quadratic form. So let me kind of rewrite it. Just I change variable to write P1 minus P2 is equal to U1 and let us make this change of such variable and then you get this formula that this differential form is just differential of G which is again periodic function minus quadratic form. Okay, so again we have exactly the same situation. We have a, so this periodic function so therefore this periodic function descend to the torus with respect to the, you can quotient by this Q translation in Q1 and P capital one of the there. So it's a descend to this torus. So on torus cross R2, you have a function which is a periodic function plus some quadratic form, non-degenerate quadratic form. And this is a subject of what is called stable Morse theory. If you have a periodic, if you take a quadratic function has a sum zero, that's a critical point. You can find it by minimax. And if you perturb the quadratic function by something with kind of bounded, then this thing is still have a critical point which is we can find by minimax. Anyway, it's a kind of elementary Morse theory which called stable Morse theory and it's imply existence of this critical point. So this is a whole proof of Poincare of Arnold conjection. And so it's, so really, really it's a proof which just can be written in one page and it's in addition to Poincare argument it just require just only these properties that any map can be the composition of small one. Okay, so actually I jumped ahead because this proof, this my proof of Poincare theorem required four dimensional symplectic geometry. I kind of passed to this graph and I was talking about Lagrangian submanifold in four dimensional space. But in fact, kind of like logically first case to consider B, so like it's very kind of, you know, when you study, of course when you study complex geometries and you're jumping from complex dimension N to N plus one and this is kind of you jumping in real sense by two but this is a kind of real mathematics and so therefore we would like, we do not want jump by two. So we want to study symplectic geometry also in odd dimension and analog of symplectic geometry is on dimension it's called contact geometry and let me just talk a little bit about contact geometry. So what contact geometry is about? So if you have a, let's take a, let's talk about geometry of function of one variable. So if you have a function of one variable and you can somehow I would like to see simultaneously this function and its derivative and I want to draw the kind of graph of the function and its derivative. So if you take this curve which is a graph of function of derivative then it satisfies this equation of course GZ is equal PDQ and hence in three spaces the curve which is a tangent of the plane field given by this path in equation so and this is a precisely called contact structure and curve with this condition which is tangent to plane field called Legendre and curve. So this is a kind of picture, picture of contact structure you have this non-integrable plane field so they kind of rotate being tangent to some line field and this is a picture of Richard Montgomery some graphic artist Gregoire Lyon of Legendre and curve and tangent to this one that's kind of roughly what they look like and generic like a generic Legendre and curve of course need not to be graphical so it can, so if you projected to ZQ plane it would look like some kind of graph of multivariate function with this cast point but when you projected to PQ plane you still always get a smooth curve possibly with self-intersection so you can think that you can just looking at the functions with curve like this emerged and you integrate the area and you're getting picture like this. So this curve is not something abstract it's again it's applied mathematics because this front you see when you're skating you're kind of on the skating you see the fronts of Legendre and curve and projection of fronts you see when you're looking at this beautiful picture which is called caustics. So let's discuss the following kind of question which I, okay so there is this in elementary calculus there's a called roller theory, right? So we have a, if you have a function which take equal value say at the end then it has to be, you have a point where derivative is equal to zero. So in other way to say that Legendre and graph of this curve cannot be contained if it contained in upper half space P greater than zero then the right end of this curve the z-coordinate of the right end have to be above z-coordinate of the left end. Question, is it true for any Legendre and curve? Answer of course negative this is the front of Legendre and curve where slope at every point is positive but nevertheless at the end it's lower than the beginning. So how it turns out the answer is positive which you impose the following condition you consider all Legendre curves say between two planes q equal zero and q equal one and consider such curve which is a topic in the class of Legendre and curve to the graphical curve and turns out for any such curve you have the following theorem and this is a kind of, this is a, I've proved some version of the theorem in 81 and this is a kind of like follows another version from then you can see in 83 and it also follows from Chicano result in 87 and it's also followed from argument of Jean-Claude Cicara for in 87. So it says that if you take a front of Legendre and curve in this class then this front inside contain graph of continuous piecewise smooth function. So you can, on this front there are a lot of unnecessary pieces and if you just leave only this red part so you get graph of continuous piecewise smooth function and because derivative is positive even for such piecewise smooth function it has to have, and here is higher here. So this is a kind of essentially equivalent to Daniel Benekin's theorem and so it's kind of again it's implies rigidity, symplectic rigidity in content dimension three and in fact the proof and the kind of I had in mind different proof but the proof by Cicara is exactly in the spirit of my proof of one kind of theory. So the true new era kind of started in symplectic topology with Gromov paper to the holomorphic curve and what Gromov did, he just, he needed some tools to kind of to how he, well actually I should say the Gromov this father of all this H principle types mathematics but he always hated it from the very kind of beginning and kind of he always always wanted to do something more rigid and so kind of this and in particular, in particular very much wanted this symplectic kind of rigidity structure and he would kind of, symplectic structure is kind of too flexible like topology there is nothing to hold and so he wanted some structure which would rigidity and then would allow us to define some invariance and then hopefully this invariant would be independent of this extra structure and this scheme of course by the time was already realized by Donaldson and for dimensional topology using model space of solution of some different elliptic problem of this so-called anti-Seldulian mill situation and Gromov's idea of Gromov was just to realize similar thing and not only idea that what he did and he realized that it's using instead model space of all the morphic curve and probably I will kind of not talk about this in detail because it's required more than 51 seconds which I left but still I have a lot of things to say okay so just I want to say that a lot of kind of great development follows after Gromov and this guy first of all in his paper kind of fantastic number of new results for instance as I said he proved that there is no embedded Lagrangian sub-manifold in R2N and then he defined first kind of genuinely symplectic by genuinely symplectic I mean something which is dependent on symplectic for not volume form invariant as we called for instance Gromov with now and it's allowed him to prove the squeezing theory non-squeezing theorem that as a ball cannot be symplectically embedded in poly disk of large volume but kind of narrow in one direction and he proved uniqueness of standard that infinity symplectic structure in R4 and contractability of the group of compact supported symplectic diffimorphism of R4 and many, many morphic curve. So Gromov promised even more great result in his paper Grot 2. So unfortunately Grot 2 was never written but then kind of like despite this kind of the development continued with kind of fantastic speed and so first floor kind of modified Gromov approach making more like connoisseur proof to define his floor homology theory and then Hofer applied this instead of from defining invariant of domain he used similar scheme to apply to define invariance of diffimorphism and this kind of created all this area of Hofer geometry which is really in some sense brought closer to realization this Poincare dream of getting great result out of nothing just kind of like using only symplectic property of a map and not analyzing equation in detail and so this is also kind of independently was done by Claude Viterbo and then Cliff Taubes united this with cyberquit and severe in dimension four which again brought a lot of great progress in for four dimensional topology and then furthermore this was a kind of by physics development and suggested that you can define what is called quantum product it's some kind of deformation of a cosmological multiplication on symplectic manifold and it's also suggested some kind of nice way of packaging invariant coming from Gromov Gromov homomorphic curve to what is called Gromov written potential and this kind of found link with theory of integrable system with mathematical theory of mirror symmetry, et cetera so I also want to say that flexible site of geometry which is kind of another start amazingly still alive well so for instance, Larry Gooth proved in some sense almost converse to Gromov non-squeezing theorem so Gromov non-squeezing theorem says that when you embed say one polydisk to another then the smallest radius of the first one have to be smaller than smallest radius of the second and of course volume which is a product of radius should be less than the product of this one and there was a lot of effort of people try to prove something about intermediate radius like in dimension if you take four dimension there is nothing left but you have in high dimensions there are a lot of intermediate radius and what Larry proved that at least up to some constant there is no other constraint so also kind of recently with some collaborator I proved that in fact when you consider problem of Lagrangian self-intersection then in fact you don't have anything like what was Lagrangian intersection theory says it says that if you have two Lagrangian manifold that they have to intersect and kind of more in the number of points and then it's kind of required by topology and also I don't know if Arnold formulated it or not Arnold but at some point all questions in symplectic topology became known as Arnold conjecture so it was Arnold conjecture but maybe it was Arnold conjecture maybe not that if you have a say any if you take any exact Lagrangian immersion the number of self-intersection point also should be bounded below by kind of something like half of rank of homology and turns out that this is a completely wrong and for instance like this is one corollary that is a three dimensional case every manifold admit Lagrangian immersion to three dimensional into R6 is just only one transverse intersection point and kind of similar result exists in another dimension so I in fact wanted to say much more but probably I will skip this thing so what I just let me just say what I wanted to say but I will not say so I wanted to say that amazingly there is the symplectic geometry came kind of on the new round like this this Gromov written theory it's some kind of Gromov written theory you can interpret as a kind of enumerative algebraic geometry in some sense with the counting of holomorphic curve subject to certain conditions and so what turns out that this Gromov written theory can be formulated as a symplectic geometry on some other space some infinite dimensional space and just developing the symplectic geometry in infinite dimensional space you amazingly get result about your finite dimensional manifold for instance like this is a question of counting rational, rational curve in the complex projective plane and this is a kind of many now beginning from conservative many and recurrent relation for this is known but what I just wanted to say just kind of brief you so if you consider this generating function for all these numbers then you can do the following thing you consider some infinite dimensional space space of some formal Fourier series with this symplectic form in this one and now you consider this particular Hamiltonian in this space and you consider flow of this Hamiltonian and then this flow is in fact kind of if you write this is if you write as one equation is a so-called total equation dispersionless total equation and then you take a zero section and in this space and flow it with this total flow with this flow of this Hamiltonian and so this moving manifold satisfy what is called Hamiltonian Jacobi equation this is one written then and then you take it and then you take this Lagrangian manifold and this Lagrangian manifold has some generating function that it's a graph or differential of some function you take this function and evaluate this function at certain particular point namely at the point with coordinates z e to the ix zero so evaluate it and fantastically you get this generating function for this number okay so just well so this is a kind of great symplectic highway from Fonkare to Gromov and it's still very busy and going very far I'm squeezing so much in the 51st century something that confused me a little bit about the history of the Arnold conjecture did he formulate it for two dimensional surfaces only or did he? No, so Arnold certainly formulated in general case Arnold formulated in many, many times so there was a kind of, there was his 65 paper and then he repeated in many other publications so I'm not sure what exactly in 65 paper but by 69 definitely kind of all cases of known today Arnold conjecture formulated and Arnold conjecture as you know it's kind of not proven yet right because Arnold conjecture Arnold conjecture what is Arnold conjecture? It says Arnold formulated in the following way that there's a number of fixed point of symplectomorphism is bounded below by the number of critical point of function and of course people immediately replaced it okay it's bounded by some of beta numbers so sometimes it's correct bound but quite often it's incorrect bound and kind of in general case they're just completely open and there is absolutely no even close to be proven maybe it's wrong You mentioned two different things that's the fact that you come to a new flexibility result and also it exists is a homological theory What is the logical link between these two trends? Well you know that the whole symplectic topology I hope to convey this idea it was kind of was born out of this fantastic tension on flexible side and on rigid side right somehow that was a some result on flexible side some other rigid side but suddenly this fantastic explosion happened and so kind of what I just wanted to say is that this pressure continued Are the manifolds? Okay so great question Okay so it's certainly people I think generalized this line of idea to many manifold no not just torals for instance like you have like Arnold so it's essentially what I said this idea of generating function right so this is just a slightly packaging of this the question where generating function can be applied and so you know this is a in more no kind of modern language this is now kind of reformulated on this categorical language of shifts and so Tamar can claiming but I don't know that this can be somehow he can define Gromov with invariant using this so maybe it's possible so then it will be like development of this idea


Hello everybody, Andrew Mayesky here with Dental L. So let me talk to you guys about this new, well, not new, but new to me, I guess, a 2.5% sodium fluoride varnish that I love. Why do I love it so much? Because it's not sticky and patients like it. When I used to work in a dental office, I would always talk about the fluoride varnish. I would say I will be applying this to your teeth afterwards to protect the teeth, seal everything up, whatever I'm doing it. But they would say, oh, is that that sticky stuff? I don't like that, it hurts my stomach. Oh, is that that stuff that tastes funny? I don't like that. This is not sticky. It comes in mint, bubblegum or caramel. This one's caramel, it's actually pretty good. But it's not sticky, it tastes better and it doesn't leave that film on the teeth. Even if it's not sticky, after you have like a fluoride varnish, you can kind of tell it's there. This stuff is amazing. And you can eat or drink right away. You don't have to tell the patient way to half an hour because nobody likes that.  They don't want to wait a half an hour. Adults, children can eat or drink right away afterwards. But how do you apply it? So if you wanna use a thicker brush, so you don't want to use the purple one. You see how that's really, really thin? Don't use the purple one. Use a thicker one. One drop is all you need, maybe two depending on the mouth. Obviously put it into a dappen dish because it is still sticky in the dappen dish. Put it on, probably bend the brush. But how you put this on is you put it on the bottom first and then the top. Not on the teeth, but where the teeth and gum meet. So you put it on there, just one like swoop. One swoop here, that's it.  And then they can spit into the sink afterwards. Done, it takes like half a second. I don't use the suction to help them with their saliva because it might clog it up. So I do have them spit into the sink afterwards, but they can ear drink right away. So when I first started using this, I had used it how I would all of the other varnishes that I've ever used. I would put over the teeth everywhere. There was too much. Like you can tell you are using too much if you get those like white pieces in there and then the patient's kind of like, what is that? That's how you know it's too much, okay? You have to apply it differently than that. So how I said before, just one sort of sweep on the bottom, one on the top. For some reason they say to do the bottom and then the top, I forget why I'll have to check the video. Check out the video that they have on oralscience.com. But you do the bottom, the top, top.  Best stuff ever, patients will actually use it. You are protecting their teeth. It does last six months apparently. So wind up. Thank you guys so much for listening. I will talk to you guys soon and I'll see you in the next one.