output voltage of the solar cells is dc, again is a variable dc, not a fixed dc, is not it? Variable dc, variable dc, bulk of the one way is to use directly charge the battery may be fine, depending upon the solar size, sorry size of the voltage rating the panel and the requirement, I may have to process this dc, depending upon the power level, depending upon the power level, depending upon the voltage level, the type of a dc to dc converter that is required will change, are you with me, dc to dc converter. So, let us see what are the possible possible topologies, most of them you may know and what application, which one, how do we use the selection of a proper topology, depending upon the power level. So, broadly these are divided into two groups, one is with transformer, another one is without transformer and with transformer, dc to dc with transformer, we are till in the in the transformer class that we should not give a very popular question in the why why you ask, what happens if I give dc to dc to a transformer, now tell me, let me tell you one thing, if I do not use a transformer in a dc to dc converter, I am telling you the size of the equipment would not have come down to this level, only thing is of course, I can use a transformer in a dc to dc, but I should not allow it to, I should not allow it to saturate, I should not allow it to saturate, that is all, the frequency of operation is fairly high. So, as frequency increases, n comes down, core losses increases. So, use a, see the problem use a ferrite core, the moment I use a ferrite core, it is going to be brittle, brittle, brittle, there are other cores are also and again BR is very low, the flux density, operating flux density operating flux density of a ferrite core is very low, could be of the order of 0.2 to 0.25 tesla, 0.25 to 0.25 tesla, so B average is low, B average is low. So, MR first alloy available, B average, this could be of the order of 1 to 1.1 tesla. So, if you want to use a good transfer rate of the size, you have to go in for MR first alloy, boost converter, that is what in the beginning of my talk, I told that either I have a low voltage solar panel, my application requires 230 volts line phase or 240, 440 volts, 440 volts line to line. I have a question to ask, output voltage here is suppose, this is equivalent circuit of a, equivalent circuit of a, what this could be? Sir, say something when come on, half bridge, half bridge, of course, this may not be the ground exactly. One AC source, I have shown only one leg of an inverter, one leg of an inverter, AC source here, inductor is a grid, are you with me? The inverter feeding power to the grid, equivalent, some equivalent circuit. Assuming that here is, I require 230 volts phase voltage or 440 line to line, 440 line, what is the DC link that is required for a 3 phase inverter? What is the DC link voltage that is required for 3 phase inverter? What is the DC link voltage that is required for a 3 phase inverter feeding power to the grid? What is the DC link that is required? What is the DC link voltage that is required for a, for a, I get a 3 phase AC here, I get a 3 phase AC, I have to, through an inductor, I have to connect it to the grid. If the voltage is, grid voltage is 440, line to line, what is the DC link that is required? What is the DC link required? What is the order of DC link? Order, around may be, if it is 440, this link is good, the order of 750 volts, could be of the order of 750 volts, minimum, depending upon the wave shaping, it could be higher than 750 also. How would it be, how this figure is around? We will discuss it later, we will discuss, because grid connection, I will emphasize on this sometime later. 750 volts, assuming that it is 750, I cannot have a 750 volts panel there, are you with me? I may have a, I may have a low voltage solar panel. In other way, we say that whatever the solar panel, low voltage, you invert it, use a transformer and feed it. The moment I use a transformer, there is a problem, size, cost, bulky, noisy, everything. So, this voltage I have to increase it to, this voltage I have to increase it to 750 volts or so, 750 volts or so. Assuming that I have a low voltage DC panel, what do I do? What do I do? I have to use, somehow I have to boost the DC voltage. Now, the configurations and all will change, let me tell you one thing you might, might have heard about it, there are various other issues, a very important circuit one has to understand, boost converter circuit, apology, principle of operation is fairly simple. Close the switch, close the switch, what is the equivalent circuit? When I close the switch, what is the equivalent circuit? Inductor is connected to DC source, at the output stage, capacitor is connected to the load. So, you store the energy in the inductor, open the switch, open the switch, stored energy in the inductor is transferred to the capacitor, transferred to the capacitor. So, if I derive the transfer function, what is the condition? Average voltage across the inductor should be 0, are you with me? Average voltage is, when it is, when the switch is closed, it is VDC, which is positive current increases. When the switch is open, the switch is open, voltage across the inductor should be, when the switch is closed, voltage across the inductor is VDC and it is positive, current increases. Are you with me? When the switch is closed, current increases, when I open the switch, current should decrease. So, voltage across the inductor should be negative, voltage across the inductor should be negative. So, when this voltage will be negative? When this is at a higher potential than this, this is the equal circuit when the switch is opened. So, voltage across the inductor is negative when this potential is higher than this. So, the circuit to work satisfactorily V naught output voltage must be higher than V input, must be higher than the E input that is the condition. So, you equate it, I do not want to get down to this mathematics average voltage of the inductor is 0, you will get a transfer function which says that V dc is equal to 1 minus d, V dc divided by 1 minus d. So, if I plot it when d tends to 1, V naught tends to, V naught tends to infinity, is it okay? V naught tends to infinity. Now, see the equivalent circuit, sorry see the circuit operation, that is we have not committed any mistake, analysis is perfectly okay, V dc, V naught is equal to V dc divided by 1 minus d, okay, d tends to 1, V naught tends to infinity. What happens here? This is equal to d naught, d tends to 1, this is the equivalent circuit, most of the time, most of the time switch is closed, most of the time switch is closed, most of the time switch is closed. So, most of the time switch is closed. So, dc is permanently connected, sorry source is permanently connected to inductor, inductor is permanently across a inductor. So, what will happen at the input side? What will happen to the input side? dc is permanently connected or again popular question in the undergraduate, we are connecting a dc to the inductor, current will increase linearly, therefore flux also will increase linearly, beyond a point it will get saturated, the moment it gets saturated, what happens? The moment it gets saturated, current is limited by its resistance, what is the steady state current here? V by R, steady state current is V by R. At the output stage, what happens? Capacitor is permanently connected across the load, output voltage tends to 0, output voltage tends to 0, output voltage tends to 0, why there is such a significant difference? Ideal condition, we have not done any mistakes perfectly, only thing is we have not taken the resistance into account, because this equation says that V L is equal to V dc, V L is equal to V dc when the switch is closed, only thing we ignored is V dc is equal to L df by dt plus plus plus R into i, that is all we have done, that is the small mistake that we have committed. So, but then why there is such a such a huge difference? Output voltage tends to 0, output voltage tends to infinity, see efficiency of ideal Carnot engine and efficiency of practical Carnot engine, ideal may be 100, but non ideal is not 0. So, why it is so? Where is our mistake? Where have you gone wrong? Of course, internal resistance you have to take into account, fine. The basic assumption that we have made here, V0 and Vdc are constant and triple feet, they are not valid. Can I assume V0 will remain constant in this case? Can I assume? No, if I, if I permanently if d is closed, switch is closed for most of the time, here V0 tends to, V0 tends to 0, V0 tends to 0, V0 tends to 0, maximum boost that I can get here is of the order of 7 to 10, 10 is the maximum, we cannot go above that. Your currents are very high, currents are very high, see here what happens here is to boost it, I have to close most of the time, are you with me? So, the moment I close most of the time here current peak current increases, increases, increases. So, maximum ratio that I can get is of the order of, of the order of 7 to 10, 7 to 10.  So, for that input voltage, if I have to boost it, input voltage itself could be of the order of you require around 350 volts. If I want a 230 volt RMS AC, inverter input required input is of the order of 350 to 400 volts. Now, as of now you take it, I will tell you how did I arrive at this figure, are you with me? For 230 volt RMS, I may require around 350 to 400. Assume that I have a 48 volt panel, maximum ratio I can get is maybe 7 to 10, a thumb rule, what do I do? I said input DC link voltage, see now we are talking about a miniaturization, 50 or transommer I cannot use it. So, I have to use, I have to boost, I have to boost, no, I have to boost the DC voltage. Somehow my DC link voltage should be of the order of 350 to 400 volts. I have a 48 volt panel or a 24 volt panel. So, assuming that I have a 48 volt panel, the ratio is of the order of 10. Again, I am hitting the limit there, what do I do? We require the DC link voltage is of the order of 450, 350 for that figure, do not? Cascade, see the moment I use cascade, the overall efficiency is again, see component count increases, component count increases, stages N1, NETA 1 into NETA 2, thought of issues, component count, what do I do sir? Increase the voltage level, go for higher panel, no, no, come on, what do I do? We may single stage with, see these are, I said there are two classes, one is, one is, one is with transformer and other without transformer. Without transformer, we cannot have or this, this topologies various buck, buck boost or a boost topologies can be used only if, only if the ratio of input and output is not very high. I cannot use a buck converter if the output voltage, output voltage that I want is very low compared to the input. I cannot use it, I cannot, there are various issues, are you with me? I cannot use it. Similarly, if I want to have a very high voltage here, I cannot use this boost, cannot use this boost, cannot use this boost. Now, can I use a transformer? Now, use a transformer then there is a various topology buck boost, quick converter, see what I am saying is not a very popular topology. If I have to reduce the capacitor size, can I use a quick converter? Quick converter, yeah, I have developed a simple theory, I have an inductor, I close this, close the switch, current in the inductor increases linearly. Can I open the switch? Sir, can I open the switch? I cannot open the switch, I have to provide a path for the inductor current. So, what do I do? Freewheeling diode, the moment I fit a freewheeling diode, what happens? Stored energy in the inductor is dissipated as heat with the internal resistance, are you with me? So, stored energy here is dissipated as heat. My question is, can I recover the energy? Can I recover the energy? Can I recover the energy? The question is, can I recover the energy? Yeah, no, no, no, capacitor 9. I will go back to a transformer, 50 hertz transformer. I have a transformer here, how do we place these dots? How do we place these dots? What is the dots convey? What are they? What do we, the moment I am showing a mutually coupled circuit 2 dots, what does it imply? Polarity, these two terminals are of the same polarity. If this is positive, this is positive. So, assume for me, in the sense when, so either to transform or when primary and secondary can carry the current at the same time, remember, in a conventional transformer what happens? Primary is connected to the source, secondary is connected to the load. If it is open circuit, of course, there is no current only the magnetizing current. Now, let me not discuss that. Assuming, so both the coils are carrying current simultaneously, are you with me? So, at that time when the current enters the dot, current enters the dot, what happens in the secondary? Current leaves the dot, is that okay? Current enters the dot, current leaves the dot, provided both the coils are carrying current simultaneously. Aayana, now what I will do is consider a case here, consider a case here. I have modified the circuit, the transformer, high frequency transformer, primary is connected to DC source. I will close the switch, current enters the dot. Aayana, current enters the dot. The natural direction should be current, current leaves the dot. Can current leave the dot? Current cannot leave the dot because of the diode. Are you with me? Current cannot leave the dot because of the diode. So, therefore, when the primary is carrying current, there is no current in the secondary. So, is the DC current, current in the flux in the core increases linearly. The core increases linearly. Can I open the switch now? Can I open the switch? Can I open the switch? If I have to open the switch, what should happen? Flux in the core should be continuous. Flux in the core should be continuous. So, what should be, if both the coils are carrying current, if one coil is carrying current at a time, what should be the direction of current? I am telling you, both the coils are carrying current simultaneously. Current enters the dot, current leaves the dot. So, the flux produced by I2 opposes the flux produced by I1 because both of them are carrying current simultaneously. Are you with me? Now, only one coil is carrying current. Only one coil is carrying current. I am not allowing the current. When the current is entering the dot, no current enters here. So, what happens when or what should be or what should be the direction of current in the secondary when the switch is opened? What should be the direction of flux and why and why? Why it is here they are opposing? See here, I1 flux produced by I1 flux produced by I2 opposing. Here, if only one coil is carrying current at a time, what should be the direction of flux? When only one coil is carrying current at a time, if current enters the dot, current should enter the dot here. If current leaves the dot, current should leave the dot, current should leave the dot. So, that flux produced by I1 should be the same or direction of flux produced by I1 should be same as that of direction of flux produced by I2. So, what happens is when I close the switch, current in the coil increases, the primary increases linearly. When I open the switch, sorry, when I close the switch, current enter the dot. So, when I open the switch in the secondary, in the secondary, current should enter the dot, current should enter the dot. So, diode connections are very important. What could be the transfer function? What philosophy can I use? What principle will I use? What should be the direction of, what is the transfer function? What is the transfer function? In boost, we said the average voltage across the inductor is 0. Come on, average voltage across the inductor is 0. What principle will I use it here? What is the transfer function? May I use the transformer now? What could be the transfer, what could be the transfer function? When I close the switch, flux in the core increases. When I open the switch, flux in the core decreases. What will I use? What principle will I use? In boost, average voltage across the inductor is 0. What will I use it here? Average flux linkage is 0. What is that? Defy rate of change of flux in the primary, volt turn, volt second per turn. What does that mean? Volt second per turn. What is it? Volt second per turn. Sir, what is volt second per turn? V is equal to N d phi by dt. So, this is volt V into dt divided by N is equal to d phi d phi. So, if there is a volt second per turn balance in the primary and secondary, that should be the condition, volt second per turn balance. So, flux rate of change of flux is equal to rate of, rate of change d phi d phi d phi. So, you equate it, you equate it in the primary and secondary. Now, you will get the transfer function as you can derive. I do not want to transfer function as V dc into N 2 by N 1 d divided by 1 minus d. This is the transfer function. V dc into N 2 divided by N 1 into d divided by 1 minus d, 1 minus d, 1 minus d. So, d divided by 1 minus d. What is sort of a transfer function is this? See, same thing. I have derived increase in flux, decrease in flux, various theory that you can go. V naught is equal to V dc divided by N 2 divided by N 1 divided by 1 minus d. This is what, what is this? Bug boost. For d less than 5, for d less than 5, V naught is less than, come on. d less than 5, if N 2 by N 1 is 1, if N 2 by N 1 is 1, N 2 by N 1 is 1. If N 2 by N 1 is 1, for d less than 5, 0.5, output voltage is less than input, for d greater than 0.5, output voltage is higher than input. So, is it the isolated bug boost, isolated bug boost, isolated bug boost. See, same problem you have, d tending to 1. What is the output voltage? d tending to 1. What is the output voltage? Infinity. See, we have a problem. Whatever the problem that we had in boost converter, same problem we have here also. That problem exists in bug boost. That problem exists in isolated also. You cannot have high values of d here. The moment you have high values of d, it will get saturated. Transformer is permanently connected to DC. It may get saturated. It may get saturated. It may get saturated. So, now I can choose suitable ratio N 2 by N 1. So, input voltage is low. You require a high output voltage. You can choose accordingly. So, basically it is a flyback converter. If your inverter rating is of the order of 75 watts, say not more than 100, 150 watts, you can use this. This is not suitable for, not suitable for, say, not more than 200 watts or so. Suitable for low power inverter, low power inverter, sorry, low power application, low power application, low power application. If I want to increase the power further, what do I do? If I want to increase the power further, what do I do? See, you cannot use this. See, topologies change as the power rating. This is suitable for, I told you here, written here, very popular up to 200 watts. About 200 watts, it is not popular. This, are you with me? I want a low voltage, 200 watts, I may be able to use. If I have a slightly, say, around 500 watt, 500 watt solar panel, what topologies to use? Why, what are we doing here? What are we doing here? We might have used a transformer, but the moment I use a transformer, one thing that comes to my mind is, both the coils should carry current simultaneously. See here, I am using the transformer only. I am using it as an inductor, storing the energy, dumping it here. Both the coils are not carrying current simultaneously. Trans transformer means it should carry simultaneously. Moreover, it is only DC excitation. So, in the BH loop, my operation is in the first quadrant.  Here, I am using it as when primary is carrying current, secondary is not carrying current. So, that is the reason, it is suitable only for low power. So, if I want to increase the power further, which one should I use? Slowly, go back, forward converter. Do not worry about this connection. We will see. Look at this circuit. Look at this circuit. Do not look for the third connection, N 1 and 2. See that, see, have you seen the circuit before? What is this? Buck converter, inductor, capacitor, load, diode. Here, there is a switch. Are you with me? So, basically, this is a buck converter, I guess. Now, what is this? There is a transformer, high frequency transformer. One like, no, no, no, no. So, fly back. Close the switch. Current enters the dot. Are you with me? Current enters the dot. Current can? Leave the dot. Current can leave the dot. Isn't it? So, now, both the coils are carrying current simultaneously. So, what is the current that is flowing in? What is I 1 now? What is I 1? In the previous case, only one coil was carrying current. I 1 was, is, is the magnetizing current alone? I have a transformer, fly back, low power, when the only one coil was carrying current, only one coil was carrying current. Secondary is open. So, primary current is the no load current itself. It is the magnetizing current. Hi and ah. Here, both the coils are carrying current. So, I 1 is, I 1 is magnetizing current plus, plus the secondary current, plus the secondary current, plus the secondary current, plus the secondary current. So, therefore, I cannot, I do not think I can use the same transformer here. So, my cross-sectional area of the conductor should be, see the, all the design issues you need to take. You should not say device, my equipment is not working. See, all of you are asking that you need to set up a lab there. Arrive with me. Lab, there will be converters, inverters. Now, things are going to be bit more difficult than managing the only street lights or the geyser. Arrive with me. Inverters will be there. DC to DC converter will be there. Storage oscilloscopes will be there.  Arrive with me. Use of oscilloscope in power electric circuit is extremely important. Very, a small mistake here and there, it will damage your control circuit as well as the, as well as the, as well as your oscilloscope, which is not the case in electronics, digital and analog electronics. There is only one ground. Here, there is grounds or reference point itself is changing, floating grounds. I will tell you sometime later. So, these are basic principles you need to understand. If you want to set up a lab there, you need to set up a lab there. What precaution do you need to take care? Yes, you will be able to do only when you understand these concepts. So, cross-sectional area of the conductor is high here. Now, I open the switch. See, but the primary current is magnetizing current plus, plus secondary current. Now, secondary, when I open the switch, what should happen? Secondary current, whatever that are flowing here, will continue to flow through freewheeling diode. Flux in the core should be continuous. There was some flux, magnetizing current was increasing linearly. Therefore, flux increased linearly. It has reached some value. Now, you want to open the switch. What should happen? Flux, you have to provide a path. Provide a path. You follow what I am saying. You have to provide a path for the flux in the core. Flux must be continuous. Flux must be continuous. What will you do? Flux must be continuous. I do not know why you are saying provide a one-guide looking at it or... What did you do here? Only one coil is carrying current at a time. So, logically, you will be, there is a reason I told you, you think logically, take a paper and pencil, you will hit the jackpot, you will get an answer. What did we do here? Only one coil is carrying current. We provided a path for the magnetizing current. When I close the switch, current here is only the magnetizing current, because secondary is zero. When I opened the switch, I allowed the current to flow in a second winding, second winding. What should be the direction of current there? If current enters the dot, current enters the dot. If current enters the dot, current enters the dot. When two coils are not carrying currents at the same time, if they are carrying currents at the same time, current enters the dot, current should leave the dot. If one coil is carrying current at a time, if current enters the dot, current should enter the dot when I open the switch. So, this we know. Now, I have to combine it. That is all. How to combine it? Did you follow or no? Is that clear? No. Sir, third one. So, this is worked. So, current enters the dot, current should enter the dot. This is nothing but the magnetizing and all that. So, here when I close the switch, current enters the dot, current enters, current can leave the dot. So, now, I2 is finite. This is nothing but our conventional transformer. Whatever the current that was flowing here, I2, it will continue. I will provide a path here. But I have not done anything for the magnetizing energy. But I know how to take care. So, I will have one more winding. I will have one more winding. I will have one more winding. But in that winding, current should flow only when, only when switch is opened, only when the switch is opened, only when the switch is opened. Here, I have connected to the same source, connected to the same source. Else, what I can do is, what else I can do is, see I had, what I can do is, in the third winding, what should happen? Current enters the dot, current should enter the dot. No, that is why I am storing energy in the capacitor, I can have some load there. That is not a problem. Do not worry. Where capacitor getting short circuited? No, I will not. What is this? This winding is, when current enters the dot, if this is a transformer, current enters the dot, current should leave the dot, not possible, not possible. Aayana, current enters the dot, current? Leave the dot. Leave the dot, yes. So, this current is now magnetizing current plus, I2 prime, I2 prime. Now, I2 prime when I secondary is open, so load load whatever the current is flowing in it circulate here, but magnetizing current has to be taken care. So, this is nothing but, when current, if current enters the dot, current can enter the dot, current can enter the dot. So, this is basically, what is this? The previous circuit that you have studied. I do not need to do all this. Instead, see, instead of charging the capacitor, what I can do? I can feed it back to the source, make sense or not? If I can store, if I can dump this magnetizing energy in a capacitor, cannot I feed it back to the source? Do not ask me how? Is it possible or no? Possible. That is what we can do. Instead of having a separate capacitor, feed it to the source. Current enters the dot, current can enter the dot. So, this you can use it till, say 500 watts or so. Suppose, if I want to increase it further, 1 kilowatt, what do I do? Again here, operation is still in the first quadrant, BH loop. Are you with me? So, what do I do? If I have to increase the power further, 1 kilowatt solar panel I have, what do I do? Sorry, we did not derive the transfer. What could be the transfer function here? What could be the transfer function? When the switch is opened, what is the voltage here? What is the voltage here? When the switch is, sorry, when the switch is closed, what is the voltage here? Turn's ratio into the input voltage. Are you with me? When the switch is off, when the switch is off, what is the voltage is? 0. So, this is nothing but a buck or naught of the forcing function of input voltage into turns ratio. So, N2 by N1 into VDC, this is okay for 500 watts or so. Suppose, if I have a 1 kilowatt panel, I have to use, I have to use the both the entire BH loop, AC excitation of the similar. What I will do is, what I will do is, see here, please try to understand, what am I doing here? This, what is this? You have seen this circuit. Gentlemen, please do not copy, do not try to understand. What is this? Centretrapped? Centretrapped transformer. What are you doing? Centretrapped transformer. It is a full wave rectifier. It is a full wave rectifier, full wave rectifier. So, what am I doing? This DC, see you people, I do not, sorry, should not be saying that, whether you have given thought over it or not. What am I doing here is, I have a DC, DC supply with a Centretrapped transformer. I will convert it into AC, high frequency AC. I will convert a high frequency AC, then rectify it, then filter it and it use it. I do not want to discuss the principle of operation. If you want, I can, I do not mind. Choice is yours. You tell me after 2 minutes, before that I will tell. I am doing, what I am doing is, only one switch is closed at a time. Same principle of operation, dots are there, you can analyze. Close the switch, close the switches, convert it into AC2, AC2, high frequency, sorry, this DC to high frequency AC. We had a choice, I will make this DC to AC, 50 hertz AC, then I will use, step it up. You follow what I am saying? Step it up, use a transformer, 50 hertz transformer, 50 hertz transformer there, 50 hertz transformer there. Instead what I am doing here is, doing here is high frequency, size the transformer is now very small, I have used rectify it till 1 kilowatt, it can use this. There are few kilowatts. If I want to increase the power further, what do we do? The concept is, somehow we have to, all of us are now agreed that I have to do, how to do? I have to use a DC to DC conversion, bring the voltage to a suitable value, invert it and do whatever in, feed it to the grid. Do not use 50 hertz transformer, assuming that there is no isolation required. Now you tell me, I want a constant DC at the end of the day, full wave rectification, is not it? It is a full wave rectification. Now I have a question to ask, in which size, in which case 1, 2, 3, the capacitors, size of the capacitor is small. I want a constant DC, I want a constant DC, I wanted a constant DC in that transformer. What do we do? In which case I need a smaller capacitor?  So, no, capacitor charge will get by game, chip chop. I want a load disconnected across the capacitor in all the three cases, in which case size of the capacitor is very low. It is quick, I have to wind up another 5 minutes time. I will just give the crux of the problem and I will leave you. Here more number of pulses. Here what are the capacitor is charged only for? I do not know, it is a very short duration, very short duration. In very short duration in one cycle, here twice in positive half also, negative half also, very for short duration. So, size of the capacitor is lowest here, it goes on gradually, gradually reducing. Now you tell me, I will ask another question. I said, what is the DC to AC is an inverter, full wave rectify, full wave rectify, full wave rectify, single phase full wave rectification. And I want a constant DC, I have filtered it. I want to reduce the size of the capacitor still further, because miniaturization is the theme. What do I do? I have to do high frequency conversion to DC. DC to AC, high frequency inversion has to be there. I want to reduce the size further. Is that again? No, no, you cannot increase the switching frequency beyond a certain value. It depends on what? See every time you switch, there are losses, fine, one switching losses. So, yes MOSFET may be a fast device, but then it all depends on the input voltage and the power rating. As the power rating increases switching frequency, it comes down. You have to reduce the switching frequency. You have to reduce the switching frequency. You cannot go on increasing the switching frequency. It depends on the power level, voltage level. What do I do? What could be the possible? I gave an example also. That was one, the full wave rectification. Now I want to reduce it further, because miniaturization is the theme. Somehow I want to reduce the size. What do we do? See, tell me. Here what are you doing? What am I doing here? No, no. I have this sort of a pulse. I have rectified it and I am getting something like that. Now instead what I will do is, number level should be the same. What I will do is, as this gentleman said, multiphase, multiphase and multilevel, multilevel, multilevel. You might have heard multilevel inverter, multilevel inverter. There are certain lot of advantages of multilevel inverter over conventional to level inverter. Maybe I do not have something, but not very clear. I will discuss this sometime later. But somehow I have to reduce the, because let me cover this topic then I will come back. Somehow I have to reduce the filter size requirement. I gave an example for half wave, full wave, three phase.  How to reach there? What are the possible ways? I told you this is suitable for 1 kilowatt, 1 kilowatt or so, 1 to 2, few kilowatt. But high power, our thought process has to change. What is the possible DC to DC converter that is useful? I will tell you maybe when I do DC to AC, then I have to come back. You follow what I am saying? Why am I saying that? Because there is a, there is a, though it is a DC to DC converter, I am saying we are, we are converting this DC to AC, AC. So, I need to have a rough idea about what are the possible ways of or what are the efficient ways of converting DC to AC, then can I combine? See that is all the research is all about. I know what is the best way of inverting DC to AC. Can I use it in DC to DC? Any way, any way, I have to use a transformer and therefore, thereby reducing the size of the transformer. The thought process will come back, revisit this topic sometime, later when I finish, when I cover DC to AC. If you have any questions, feel free, just 2 minutes. So, depending upon the power level, voltage level, your input stage has to change, it has to change. The tutorial process we will see how to select the proper size of transformer turns ratio, vector size we will see. But then, no, no, no, the name, let us not get stuck. Now, T, why the first one known as a fly back? This is known as fly back. What are my various, like stored energy here is being transferred there, stored energy here transferred to the secondary. Does it work as a fly? So, there are names have been generated for various reasons.  I do not want to say. So, forward here may be because primary and secondary may be, may be carrying current simultaneously. I had a question here, why fly back? See gentlemen, you have, we have no choice, but to step up DC for reducing the size. Do you agree? Do you agree? You have to step up DC. There is no way you can do, one way, one choice you have to connect boost in cascade.


Wine is switching from white rice to brown rice, enable overweight individuals to significantly reduce their weight, their waist size, their blood pressure, and the level of inflammation within their bodies. We think it might be the fiber. Brown rice has four times as much dietary fiber as white, including prebiotic types that foster the growth of our good bacteria, which may help account for the anti-obesity effects of brown rice. Besides the prebiotic fiber, there's all sorts of vitamins and minerals that are lost when brown rice is milled into white, along with phytonutrients, such as gamma-arizonal, which may theoretically help shift one's preferences to healthier foods. There are also petri dish studies that suggest it may help lower cholesterol, and along with other compounds found in rice bran, which is what makes brown rice brown, may inhibit human cancer cell growth. Through antioxidant means, anti-proliferative and pro-cancer cell suicide mechanisms, immune system modulation, and increasing barrier protection. But again, this is all just in test tubes, not people. There are two human studies, though. The Adventist Health Study found that brown rice is one of four foods associated with significantly decreased risk of colorectal polyps, which can turn into colorectal cancer. Eating cooked green vegetables every day was associated with a 24% lower risk, as much as dried fruit, just three times a week. Eating beans, chickpeas, split peas, or lentils at least three times a week was associated with a 33% lower risk, but brown rice seemed to garner 40% lower risk, and that was just a single serving a week or more. The other study reported increased muscle strength after supplementation with the brown rice compound, in hopes that it could provide a side-effect-free alternative to anabolic steroids. But the dose they were giving is equivalent to like 17 cups of brown rice a day, so it's not clear if it works at practical doses. Naturally pigmented rice, such as black rice or red rice, may be even more nutritious than brown. During the last decades, it's been shown that these natural anthocyanin plant pigments may have a variety of beneficial effects. They're what makes blueberries blue and red cabbage red. Recent recognition of the fact that diets rich in plant foods lower the risk of cancer promotes enthusiasm for isolating these compounds as pharmaceutical agents. But why not just eat the blueberries, or add some red cabbage to your stir fry, a top some colorful rice. Black, purple, and red rice and their pigment compounds have been shown a variety of antioxidant, anti-cancer, anti-heart disease, anti-diabetes, anti-allergy activities. But these are all studies done in the lab. We don't yet have clinical studies, but they have everything that brown rice has, plus five times more antioxidants in all these extra goodies. So that's why I always cook red, black, or purple rice, or rather my rice cooker does, always with a handful of lentils or split peas thrown in for good measure since they cook in the same timeframe. But why don't most people even choose brown over white? Well, brown doesn't last as long on the shelves, so it can actually be more expensive, even though it's less processed, whereas white rice is like apocalypse food, even putting twinkies to shame still edible after 30 years, though by then may have a slight Play-Doh odor.


Thank you so much for that introduction, and it's really exciting to be here with you together live in person. This is the third event in the Funding the Commons series. And the first two were virtual, so it's really great to see the community come together in person. If I'm getting a little bit of feedback, which makes it hard to talk. So thank you. Now it's still there. Great. So what I'm here to talk about is priorities for public goods builders in 2022. This is going to be a really critical year for public goods generation. And here at year I'm starting from now through the end of 2022 and the beginning of 2023. So what I'm going to go through is a case for why this year really matters and why this decade really matters in this century. I'll then talk about CryptoEcon for solving planetary problems. Then I'll go into how Funding the Commons got started and what our impact so far has been. I'll talk about some goals for the next year, and then I'm going to talk about a few different kinds of mechanisms and experiments that people may want to try. I'll try to conclude with some advice and thoughts for public goods builders out there that are trying to experiment with a lot of the tooling, and hopefully this is going to be useful in generating a whole wave of new things and new ideas and new solutions. So as I mentioned, sorry, the feedback is really very distracting. Is there any way that we can decrease it? Think a little bit lower? Excellent. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. So as I was mentioning, there's an extremely critical century. We are writing on several centuries of extreme improvement in terms of all our global development across any single, against most measures for human well-being that we know to track. We're just getting this broad-based improvement worldwide. Of course, there's all kinds of things that, all kinds of problems exist in the world, and there's all kinds of regressions along the way, and there's many things that are getting worse, but for most indicators of human well-being, the world is in a great trajectory, and the last few centuries have been a great direction. However, we're now confronted with a series of ex-risks, or how David had one of the researchers in our team likes to put public bads, in extreme public bads, that we have to really avoid. And these, especially the ones that are human-caused, present extreme challenges for us to get through, and we sort of control the speed at which we'll hit these, but especially things like nuclear war and engineered pandemics and unaligned AI. Those kinds of risks are, we're speeding well into those risks, so it's extremely critical that we coordinate our species to solve these. On top of that, there's this large-scale phase transition that we're going through. As we invented computing and as that computing has evolved and developed over the decades, we've gotten to a point where we're starting to blend and merge with our computing systems in the next few decades. When you look ahead to the next 80 years for the rest of the century, we're going to see the introduction of things like large-scale robotics, robotic swarms, augmented reality systems, virtual reality systems, brain-computer interfaces that will break through the barrier between these screens and the internet and our brains. And then we'll make AI systems that will be progressively and successively more and more intelligent to the point where we're very likely to discover AGI in this century. Many people are now estimating that this might actually happen in the next decade or two, which is extremely alarming in terms of the degree of a problem to solve here. Now to make matters a little bit trickier, the large-scale micro systems that we've been building and which have been responsible for our, the broad improvement and broad well-being for the last few centuries are starting to strain, are starting to get captured and they're kind of inadequate for solving these kinds of challenges. They're designed to go slowly, they're designed to solve problems of a different era and they can't quite cope with problems of this magnitude, of the magnitude that we're encountering and the speed that we're encountering in the map. So we need a new set of solutions, we need new structures and we need new coordination mechanisms that can enable us to solve these extreme challenges and we need those coordination systems to scale, to organize us at that scale, at that macro worldwide scale. Now it's extremely difficult to build systems of that magnitude and of that quality and hope that they go well. The last macro systems that we built took many iterations, there were all kinds of mistakes made and they progressively evolved into a much better structure. So it's a very difficult challenge to come up with something that can improve those systems and handle the breadth of challenges that these systems handle really well and on top of that then help us solve these next generation problems. However the way to get there is by applying our best perspectives and theories and testing them in the wild at various different scales, learning from those developments and get to a progressively larger and larger problem solving scales to the point where we can then coordinate millions of people, billions of people against these problems. So I think the promise of the entire blockchain world is that it's enabling us to have a programmable interface to build these kinds of coordination tools, starting with very small things that let us experiment and then from there scaling them to larger and larger sizes and along the way test that they're working well, test that they're really solving problems, test that they're actually yielding better ways of coordinating. So I'm very hopeful that we will solve a lot of these challenges and I think one of the... I often get asked what has changed my perspective about crypto and W3 and so on in the time that I've been in the community and it's that I very much undervalued and underestimated the potential impact and the potential utility of these systems. Once you step back and see them for what they really are, you realize that they're extremely powerful tools that can help us solve these kinds of problems. So let's dive into why that is. In terms of why this decade and this year really matter is that if a lot of these challenges are going to be figured out or things are going to be set in motion in the next decade or two, then this decade really matters to get to work through a lot of those experiments, get to really high quality solutions, and then from there scaling them. And in terms of this year, in the next... The blockchain world and the blockchain systems are now at the scale of somewhere between about a trillion dollars in value to three trillion depending on which month you look at it. Now that's a big enough scale to try very serious experiments but not such a big scale that it's sort of like a catastrophic system to test and vary with. So that's about the right size scale to experiment with. And if we can get some really good principles into these systems now while they're still young and they're still very hopeful and very positive, some oriented, then they'll carry those principles and those ideas through to much larger scales. Kind of what I mean by that is that when you think about putting in place things like allocating whole sections of a protocol supply towards funding of the goods, that kind of policy is very positive, some oriented, very long termist and is likely to go through now while the community is still very true to its roots and true to its values and way less likely to work in the future once everything gets much more competitive, much more zero sum oriented, and so on. So I think now is the right time to put in place these kinds of structures so that when these systems scale by an order of magnitude, two or some magnitude, and so on, they can carry lots of those values with them. So I think about the early value systems of the internet and how those inspired the web versus the web 2.0 world that became much more extractive and captured. Great, so I'm going to accelerate through these things now. At the end of the day, what CryptoEcon is about is CryptoEconomics, the study of cryptographic economic structures, is a combination of a set of fields that give us a bunch of tools to analyze these mechanisms that we can deploy at runtime into the worldwide computing infrastructure and then influence groups and large scale organizations. At the end of the day, I like calling this software eating mechanism design because it's about the software computing infrastructure that we've built out for the last few decades and using that entire continuous integration and continuous deployment structure with constant improvement and broad deployment into the world and then deploying incentive structures that can organize groups of people, whole large scale entities and so on through these systems. Just to give you a feel for how powerful these systems are, just think of the Bitcoin energy consumption and realize that that just drops out of two components in Bitcoin. One is the block reward impact evaluator and two, the price of Bitcoin. So those two things yield this tremendous energy consuming system. This was kind of an accident. Nobody quite intended this device to consume this amount of energy and waste this amount of energy, but this gives you a sense of the power of these systems. First off, we should fix this and get to better systems that actually make this energy use useful, but I use this as an example to give you a sense of the level of power that comes from these incentive structures and their operation at scale. In Facun, we're very familiar with these kinds of structures. We use the same component and we've gotten a feel for how powerful this stuff is. In just a couple of years, we ended up organizing the build out of a massive hardware infrastructure for providing storage to the world with, again, just using one core incentive structure, a block reward. So all of this makes me really, really hopeful that we'll be able to build these kinds of incentive structures that can scale to solve extremely large planetary scale problems by designing incentive structures, warping the incentive fields, and getting us to, little by little, problem by problem, scale by scale, solve challenges. And so I think I greatly encourage you, if you aren't already in this world, to try it out, to try creating some smart contracts and deploying them, to try working with other projects and so on to get a feel for how powerful these systems are.  I've become very hopeful that these systems will let us coordinate massive action, again, millions of people, billions of people, whole industries, by letting us have the full power of law and economics and so on in a fully programmable environment. I'm also very hopeful that we can get to accelerate science and technology development by using these kinds of structures to create instruments to incentivize areas of the innovation chasm that are underserved, areas where it's extremely difficult to get funding for certain projects or where it's extremely difficult to get long-term rewards or long-term success. Many of you have probably heard me talk about this science and technology translation problem and the lack of incentive structures in that period in the chasm in the middle, and I think a lot of that just comes from the lack of reward structures there that make it impossible for groups building projects there to raise capital because there's no good incentive for capital to deploy there. So knowing all of this, knowing that this is a critical century, knowing that it's a critical decade and a year, and knowing that crypto economy is extremely powerful, why are we here? Why are we in funding commons? So we thought about this problem last year and we saw that the scale of blockchains and the kind of rapid pace of development in industry and the emergence of things like DeFi and DAOs and FT and so on, and especially the broad adoption by hundreds of thousands of people or millions of people of these tools gave us a very promising landscape to be able to solve these kinds of problems. And so we have the potential to solve all these massive coordination problems, but we're lacking good mechanisms. We need way better governance structures. We need way better funding mechanisms and so on. We need to study these things with much deeper theory and much deeper experimental analysis and so on. And we also ourselves needed better structures, better funding structures, better organizational structures and so on to do our own work, to develop our own teams, to grow our own networks. So based on that, we decided to organize a movement to build these kinds of new models, to arrive at much more sustainable public goods funding, not just sustainable ideally, regenerative systems with possible externalities that are not just sustaining themselves at some level, but actually creating a lot more value around themselves. And we hope to also create structures for much better value alignment within these networks. So we decided to throw an event last year, so it's less than a year ago, despite a number of other people that helped put this on, in my memory yesterday I remembered a set of folks who are here, which I want to thank for driving this and really creating this event, but it really takes a village to put this on, and especially the Yale events team and many others who have helped. And since then we've now had three events, two virtual, one in person, and we're scaling the community and the size of the conversations, the systems that we're reviewing, the mechanisms that we're exploring, the studies that we're doing and so on. So in this conference we've gone from 11, 18 talks and now 56, really encourage you to like attend all of them simultaneously, of course you can do that. Of course you can, later in time, they're all recorded. And we're also very fortunate to be working with a whole bunch of other folks in the ecosystem, building out the broader public goods movement in the blockchain space. Great. Thanks to the Gekwon community and the Shelling Point and many other groups that are very focused on building regenerative structures. So all of this leaves me very hopeful. You know, the other impact so far has been to explore a set of funding mechanisms. Here's a few that I pulled from the YouTube channel.  Some of them also have kind of experimental review. So early days, so a lot of it is still kind of not very systematic, not very well experimented upon and so on. But I'd love to kind of crank that up and get to drastically better study to the point where we can like analyze these systems with the same level of rigor that we analyze things like network protocols or like hardware devices and things like that. We've also sort of revived the impact certificates idea and field. We've gotten to explore a number of novel entity types. I know that a few of these are actually getting booted up now, which is really awesome impact for just a few months of talking about things. And we've created some, we've talked about some coordination systems that could be extremely useful. I think this is a very promising area, but probably understudied and an area that is maybe harder or seems much more difficult to get traction on. So it doesn't get studied as much. But I really think this last one, the coordination systems, how do you get large groups of people to organize much better that holds some of the most promise? As I mentioned, you can access all of these. We're making sure that all of this is getting recorded and built into an archive that you can go and explore. They can go and send around to other people. If you think that there's something important, talk to somebody you know, should watch, like please, please go refer them to them and so on. And I want to highlight, yes, I talked a bit about the funding mechanisms on the impact certificate saying it's one of these ideas that a number of people have been discussing for the last few years. And this event really helped revive that entire track. We'll probably hear a number of talks during this conference about impact certificates and a number of projects got catalyzed out of this. So that's super exciting. And so this is exactly kind of the kind of thing that we want to have going, not just in this one area of impact certificates, but across a whole variety of potential mechanisms, potential systems. So huge props and kudos, great credit to all the people doing this work. Let's let's work on this in other areas as well. I think that there's a lot of latent potential in this coordination mechanisms layer, especially I think there's a bunch of really good ideas around things like futarky and other I'm not sure that that particular construction will work, but I think we need to a lot of experiments with those kinds of governance structures to see if there could be ways of governing systems algorithmically and with a way of aggregating a lot of our perspectives and thoughts and values in a much more systematic way than sort of like very brittle representative democracy that like doesn't really scale to to millions of people. And I think in terms of a lot of the mechanisms and structures that that we want to build, there's a lot more theory that is needed. There's a lot more implementations that are needed. There's a lot more rigorous study and assessment of performance and so on that is needed. So really encourage you to kind of pick out any of these. There's lots of interesting work to to get done here. And so, yeah, there's a super packed schedule, lots of amazing things. Definitely look look forward to it. I want to frame some goals for the community for this next year and I would love to kind of see some impact in these things. I'm going to be working on a number of these things myself. Love to invite you to join me and join a number of the other people doing this. And it'd be great to look back. So I like commit that, you know, a year from now, halfway through next year, I'll look back and kind of see how we did on some of these goals. So, you know, to introduce these again, this is a very special year in welfare and crypto. There's this there's tens of thousands of scientists and builders worldwide. There's massive scale resources in these networks, proper, well, you know, well sized experiments scale is very fluid and very easy and very excited. It's a community that's very excited to try new things. There's encountering real large scale problems and is very interested in getting solutions to work, which is very different from a lot of governments. I don't know if any of you have tried to change your local government and try to pass something, but it's an extremely grueling process compared to the idea of starting a community online of people that want to try these things and try to experiment with them. And I think in this kind of like moment of downturn in both crypto and the macro world, it's a great moment to build a lot of these things and get poised for like a very strong refi summer to come out of it. So in the crypto world has had many downturns have been in at least four of them and usually follows a cycle of there's like a big hype moment and then a downturn where people start building lots of things. In one of those downturns I started Protocol Labs and built the first version of IPFS and with a whole number of folks. And then in the next one of those, we had all of the second new next generation blockchains, a lot of the layer twos, all of DeFi, all of NFTs, all of the Dow tooling, all of that came out of that one of those build times. So really hope that in this next downturn build time, we can build all of these kinds of regenerative structures, build out a much better framework for studying all these systems and get to a much better outcome. So some goals. First and foremost, actually there's a meta goal. Let's have a few meta goals. Let's continue to grow this community, explore a bunch of domain specific tracks. Let's dive deeper into certain kinds of mechanisms. Let's maybe think of exploring, having some events that pull together a set of people focused very much in one area. Let's try and experiment with workshops and hackathons. I think we've been thinking it aloud together for a while. It's time to put a lot of that into practice and stimulate that by having workshops and hackathons that enable both theorists and builders, often the same people, to come together, connect and make a bunch of these things and experiment with them. I'd love to have some network funding for ourselves to build a network-oriented grant program to support researchers and builders in the space. I'd love to kind of like target like a, I think a five million dollar fund size is like a good place to start. Of course we can get more, that would be even better. I think we should grow the community. We should think of this as an expansion space for for us and bring new people so like each of you like bring three new people to the event and this might be just refer them to like a talk or something like get them interested in the space and recommend three speakers that you think should be talking to us about their ideas and their thoughts. Now, very concrete goals. I think the impact certificates idea space is extremely interesting, extremely valuable. Let's dive deeper into it. Let's deploy more systems. Let's deploy hyper-certificates. Let's figure out the NFT structures for them. Let's build a market. Let's build ideally multiple markets in a few different verticals. And I think it would be amazing to get to a scale of having an impact market with around fifty million dollars in value next year. I think that would be that I think at that scale is where you can see some interesting things starting to take shape. Smaller than that is harder to see it working. Higher than that is like too hard to kind of reach for in one year. I think at the fifty million dollars scale is both achievable. It's very ambitious, but achievable. And I think we'll give us like really good outcomes. Beyond that, I think impact evaluators are one of these tools that are extremely, extremely powerful. We just haven't studied or experimented with them enough. And so I invite everybody to dive into that. I might lead workshops and so on on this kind of stuff. And really let's study the outcomes because this is one of these things we want to be careful because if you get it right, you build really compelling things. You get it wrong. You get like a runaway process that is like eating up all the energy in the world. So, careful. You know, it's like Mickey Mouse with like the brooms. So yeah. And then I really think that we need much better performance evaluations of all these systems. We need good evaluations and good mechanisms and start evaluations of mechanisms and structures. We need better frameworks, better benchmarks to hit. I'd love to get to a governance, a set of governance benchmarks where you could kind of like come up with a with a benchmark test suite to analyze whether a particular governance structure is doing well or poorly for our community. So think of like having a set of features that you would want your governance systems to do well at. And then we can turn that into, you know, a set of observations that you could apply on top of any governance structure. And then it'd be great to have that as a test suite for people to develop against. In the computer science world, this has been incredibly instrumental in getting us to build the modern computing infrastructure. Almost every field that you can look at in computer science tends to have these intense battery of tests that we kept getting developed and refined and improved over time. But then every successive system has to beat. And so you get this amazing evolutionary structure where whenever you're proposing some new system, you can always run it against this ever-growing intense battery of tests and see whether it's actually better. And that yields an extremely good evolutionary environment. We need something like that for governance structures. We just don't have that. We have no way of properly evaluating whether one particular governance structure is actually going to be better than another one in a systematic, repeatable way where we can all clearly see with hard data that actually works better than another. And I think it is very achievable. So I'm going to... Actually, given the timing and that I wanted to get us on track, I'm going to skip the mechanisms and experiments to try because you'll hear a ton of them throughout the week. Maybe I'll give you just one, which is this idea of an impact evaluator. I'll maybe describe it in high level now and happy to discuss it more in detail with folks. It's a very simple system which just says that you're going to have a periodic evaluation of some value across a community. So this could be a risk contributed. This could be a rated performance against some goal. And in each time step, the impact evaluator is going to release a reward proportional to the value contributed. It's very simple. It just provides a long running, repeatable auction that consumes a set of indicators from an environment. So it measures the environment and it rates all participants and their contribution in that time step. And then it rewards proportionally all participants with a fraction of the pot together. Now, that sounds kind of serious, so you can make it positive, thanks to Evan for this idea and some other folks, I think, by just scaling the reward gets put out by the increase in the thing you're trying to measure in the indicator. And so this kind of structure can be applied to all kinds of measuring, all kinds of properties that you might want to measure.  And if you associate the work being done with the value of the reward itself, then you get this amazingly positive feedback loop that then scales really fast. That's the magic behind Bitcoin and Filecoin and a lot of these structures. So in the last 30 seconds, some thoughts and advice for everybody. Connect with other folks. I think this is one of the times in the development of a field where everything is moving very quickly and new ideas will diffuse fast. There'll be a lot of independent discovery of the same thing. And there'll be a lot of people very interested in building things. So this is not a time to hold back your ideas and develop them very deeply and then publish something like kind of like drop information theory in the world or calculus or something like that. And spend five years thinking about it. That is going to be way too slow. And I almost guarantee you that most, if not all of your ideas will probably get independently discovered. And so you'll do much better by working with a lot more people, a lot faster, develop everything much more quickly, get it deployed out there, get it tested, get it scaled. And the sooner we do this, the better, because all of that value flow will compound. So if you have a great improvement and you deploy it now and we get to have more months and years to compound it, even if it's like 20% as good as you could have done it in a year or two years, that compounding rate and that utility of scaling it sooner will be much more valuable to everybody. So I really strongly encourage you to like collaborate, work with other folks, get things tested and really kind of experiment and try things out. Like just try something, see if it works, evaluate it, measure it and so on and whatnot. And reach out for help. So if you are running into some problem, if you have some ideas and so on and you feel stuck, reach out to the community, ask for help. There's a super positive some oriented community and group. Everyone helps each other. So yeah, just reach out with your thoughts, ideas and people will be glad to help. All right. Oh yeah, ship quickly. So yeah, I guess that made that point. Make it again. And then composability. So really focus on composability of these structures. If you build a thing, try to make it as simple as possible and try to make it very composable with other tools and other systems. That is part of what made DeFi scale. That is part of what made NFTs work really well on scale. That's part of what and I think that's one of the things that's holding back DAOs. I think DAOs are not nearly as composable as they need to be. They're kind of composable but they could be much more composable. So yeah, this is let's go forth and prosper. Thank you.


Abstract RNA sequencing, RNA-SEC, is a genomic approach for detecting and quantifying messenger RNA molecules in biological samples, useful for studying cellular responses. However, it has hindered direct assessment of the fundamental unit of biology, the cell. Single cell RNA sequencing, SCRNA-SEC, was developed to address this issue by analyzing individual cells. While initially conducted by specialist laboratories, SCRNA-SEC is now commercially available and can be used by any biomedical researcher or clinician to make discoveries. This review provides a practical guide for designing SCRNA-SEC studies, including experimental hardware, protocol choice, quality control, data analysis and biological interpretation. This article was authored by Ashraf Alhuk, Jessica Engel, Sarah A. Teachman, and others.


What's good Josh if we're Ross back again with another video? So you guys have been hitting me up on social media mainly Twitter about this very interesting clip that It's been floating around been gaining some traction today So a Ghana girl end up getting interviewed in a mall basically asking to pretty much see if They could check each other's phone to you know see how well they trust each other if they trust their partner And boy does this go horribly wrong. We got to check this out Apparently the guy have been messaging a fake live Morgan. Oh my god We got to check this out. I haven't actually checked it out in his full entirety I've just seen like a little snippets of it from you guys sending it to me So we're definitely gonna check this one out cuz I already know this is about to be so Cringe inducing appreciate all love and support you guys have shown Let's see this guy Mess up his relationship. How long have y'all been together? Seven years Eight years. Oh Well, there we go. He got he got the years messed up. He said seven.  Oh my god Yes Maybe test that theory Swap phones When someone asks Like when they repeat a question to you go through snapchat That should let you notice when he hit that go through snapchat again. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah He he definitely had something to hide Because if someone says hey, can they go through snapchat your immediate response to be sure but he hesitated and repeated it again Who is live That's already a bad sign Live Morgan is not hitting you up on snapchat. That's already a bad sign No, oh, no It's already it's already looking like it's about to go down here very quickly just It's I just want y'all to know man 10 times out of 10 these WWE wrestlers are not getting you up Especially in in the DMs and especially on snapchat like oh my god Are you single? Do you have children? Oh Is GGs is GGs it's over it's over before it started. Oh my goodness Oh No, he hit the you get to get to know all your fans once again I don't know how he didn't realize this was not a real person This is someone pretending to be her. I don't know how he got finesse by that, bro Hello handsome What's crazy is he's looking at it, right? And she's looking at it at the same time so him saying nah, nah, I ain't been messaging her When she got the phone she's looking at you messenger my boy You can't you can't finesse your way out of this one. You just gotta take the L Nah, I ain't I ain't been messaging her.  Oh my god Oh This is great.   You can tell he is upset But it's his fault Eight years, bro. Eight years of a relationship Being married to this person Only to find out this nigga been texting a fake live morgan and tried his best to get out of the situation like no, bro I was just it was just a couple messages, but it It wasn't nothing serious. Y'all gotta stop man Y'all gotta stop bro. I'm telling you Gotta stop It just makes no sense for live morgan to just be randomly asking you Hey, do you have any kids like none of this, bro? Like come on Oh my god, this was great. This was Oh man Well, I don't know. I don't know. Maybe they were able to patch up their relationship. I hope they were Because that's mad. That's wild to lose your relationship over a fake live morgan. That's just just wild Comment down below Let me know man. What other uh cringe Videos you guys want me to check out if it's on instagram or twitter send it to me I love doing these type of videos man because it's just you can't make this stuff up the internet is a very interesting place So send me some more cringe clips some cringe videos that you guys want me to react to and give my commentary to On the channel man. I definitely will like I appreciate y'all sending this to me because this was just This is my laugh for the day, man I know it's messed up to laugh at potentially someone's relationship being ruined ruin But it's his fault for even agreeing to do this knowing that she could possibly check out some of his messages He should have just kept it strictly to maybe his uh phone messages But once he said snapchat Oh, he should have aborted mention, but it was too late then so this is really all on him man Next next time just don't fall for the fake WWE wrestlers, man That's it's 10 times out of 10 not them messaging you but I appreciate all love support Roll to 150k and I'm still young speedy youtube wrestling champion world. Appreciate y'all kicking in with me See y'all next piece


This study examined the potential of two types of colloidal silver nanoparticles, CSNPs those with quercetin and cafeic acid attached to them, CHU-CF-CSNPS, and those without CSNPs. The CHU-CF-CSNPS were shown to have a smaller particle size than CSNPs, and both types of particles had similar surface plasmid resonances at 417 and 424 nanometers. The CHU-CF-CSNPS also had a thicker chitosan layer around them compared to CSNPs, which could explain why they are more effective against cancer cells. Additionally, the CHU-CF-CSNPS demonstrated greater antimicrobial activity against gram-negative bacteria than gram-positive bacteria, while CSNPs did not show any significant difference between the two groups. This article was authored by Akif Hakenkert, Elif Berna Oludis, Fatma Opsioglu, and others.


Before I move on to the next item of business, I wish to make a short statement. Concerns have been raised regarding the use of a Government-initiated question to announce the additions of Manchester and Salford to the list of areas where common travel restrictions apply. I understand that this mechanism has been used on earlier occasions to make such announcements. Notably, in this case, the announcement was made by GIQ on Thursday 17 June, a sitting day, when there may have been an opportunity for members to scrutinise the decision in the chamber. I therefore ask the Minister for Parliamentary Business to reflect on whether GIQs are an appropriate method to use for these announcements on days when Parliament is sitting. In the meantime, I have selected a topical question on the issue to allow members to ask questions on the decision in the chamber at the earliest opportunity. We will now move to topical questions. I welcome the statement that you have just made in relation to the respect that this Parliament is due from the Scottish Government. It was on Tuesday, June 8, that I raised a point of order with you in which I sought confirmation that it is in order for the First Minister to come to this chamber to make Government statements, but it is not in order for her to ignore Parliament and instead make statements in front of TV cameras. At that time, I sought your help to make further representations to the Scottish Government, in particular to the First Minister, to the effect that Government statements should first be made in Parliament to allow for proper scrutiny and to show respect for our Parliament. I was heartened by the answer that you gave on that occasion, and I am further heartened by the statement that you have made this afternoon. The reality is that, last Thursday, at 11.39, 20 minutes before the First Minister's questions, SNP ministers used special powers to ban Scots from going to Manchester and Salford at 12 noon last Thursday. The First Minister said nothing to Parliament about those new restrictions. The Deputy First Minister, whose name was on the amendment, sat a few feet away from the First Minister. The next day, at approximately 12.15, the First Minister appeared on television in a staged event to announce the travel ban. Will you, Presiding Officer, take this opportunity to underline again to make clear to Parliament and to all members of this Parliament, especially members of the Government, that those acts of discurtycy bordering on contempt by the First Minister must stop and that the actions of Scottish ministers must be properly held up to scrutiny by the Scottish Parliament? I thank Mr Kerr for his point of order. I have asked the Scottish Government to reflect on the use of a GIQ when Parliament is sitting, and, as I have said previously and in accordance with guidance on ministerial statements, all significant and substantive announcements should be made to this Parliament wherever that is possible. We now move to topical questions, and I call Graeme Simpson for question number one. Thank you, Presiding Officer, to ask the Scottish Government on what basis it has introduced a ban on non-essential travel between Scotland and Manchester and Salford. Cabinet Secretary John Swinney. Thank you, Presiding Officer. The common travel area restrictions were introduced in November 2020. Decisions on which areas are subject to those restrictions are made on the basis of incidence and test positivity rates, other epidemiological factors such as hospitalisations, intensive care admissions and deaths and presence of variants of concern. Restrictions on travel tuned from Blackburn with Darwin and Bolton in north-west England and Bedford in the east of England were introduced on 24 May. We removed the restrictions on Bedford, as well as restrictions on travel to and from the Republic of Ireland on Friday 18 June, because we judged the relative risk of travel to and from those areas had reduced. Additional restrictions were introduced on travel to and from Manchester and Salford from 21 June because we judged that the risk had increased. Those additions were all linked to severely elevated case rates associated with the delta variant. All those recent changes were notified to Parliament in a written statement through a Government-initiated question and announced to the public in the First Minister's media briefing with an accompanying press notice and guidance on the Scottish Government website. Graham Simpson. Can I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer? I noticed he gave absolutely no figures in the answer whatsoever, so the public will be quite bemused by it. The legislation, in fact, is completely incoherent. It says that you have to leave Scotland with the intention of going to Manchester in order to be in breach of this law. I do not know how you can prove that. I could set off from my home in East Kilbride, go down to visit my mother in Carlyle, suddenly decide that I am going to pop down to see a mate in Manchester and not be in breach of this law. How can this possibly be enforced? Are we going to have police at the border asking people where they're going? Of course we aren't. The law is unworkable and unenforceable. With respect to the cabinet secretary's answer, how does he answer the very fair point that infection rates in parts of Greater Manchester, such as Bolton, are lower than Dundee? Bolton has a Covid rate of 269 per 100,000. How is that consistent or fair? When Bolton was added, the Bolton was added on the 24th of May. That was announced to Parliament by Government-initiated question, just exactly the same way as the announcement was made about Manchester and Salford. I completely accept and respect the words that the Presiding Officer has expressed today, and the Government will reflect very carefully on the points that the Presiding Officer has made. We felt that we were notifying Parliament properly because, on the Bolton example, we had used that mechanism before. If that mechanism is no longer judged to be appropriate, the Government will reflect on that, but we were simply using the same mechanism that we had used back in May when we announced the decision on Bolton. The Government will take away what the Presiding Officer has said, because we respect Parliament, because we notified Parliament on Thursday afternoon. If Members of the Conservative Party could not be bothered to look at their emails on Thursday afternoon at 2.39pm, you could take the horse to water, but you cannot make it drink. When Bolton was added, case rates were at 283. At that moment, there were nearly three times that of Glasgow on 24 May. That was the reason for the variation in elevated case rates. Mr Simpson asked me for more data. In relation to Manchester and Salford, Manchester was sitting at 348, Salford at 337, in excess of any case rates in Scotland and well above the Scottish average. We took those decisions based on trying to minimise the contact that we know enables the spread of the virus. That is what the whole restrictions have been about, and that was the basis of our decision to protect people in Scotland from the spread of the virus. If the cabinet secretary thinks that an email is showing respect to this Parliament, then he is looking at it completely the wrong way, because it does not. The fact is that the case rates in Manchester were very similar to those of Dundee. He has not addressed that point. If I can move on to another point, some people, because of this edict from the First Minister, have lost hundreds of pounds, but it is not just individuals who have lost out. The travel sector, which has been hollowed out, is also the loser here. Will the Scottish Government compensate individuals and businesses who have lost money because of this decision? First of all, I would say to Mr Simpson that the Government answered a Government-inspired question on Thursday, which has been viewed—I have gone through this detail before—nobody raised any issues about us using a Government-initiated question to set out the restrictions on Bolton on 24 May and Bedford and other places. If the view is now that that is not acceptable away, the Government will of course reflect on that and address any issues that Parliament wishes to raise. On the case numbers, Mr Simpson raises the issue of Manchester and Salford again. The case numbers in that area, where over 337 is the lowest compared to a seven-day incidence rate above Scotland at that particular time. The case numbers and the epidemiological advice are what drives those decisions. In relation to the question of any compensation, the Government does not believe that that would be appropriate. Travel to the north west of England has previously been prohibited last year before local levels regulations were introduced. I know that compensation was offered. We are all responsible for putting in place in our respective parts of the United Kingdom the financial support to arrangements for business, and that is exactly what the Government will continue to do here in Scotland. Thank you. There is a great deal of interest in the subject, and I would be very grateful for short questions and succinct responses. I call Jackie Baillie to be followed by Brian Whittle. The cabinet secretary will be aware that the mayor of Manchester is seeking compensation for those people who had booked holidays in Scotland, which have now been cancelled as a result. The tourism industry has had a really difficult time, and losing bookings will come as a bitter blow, whether it is from Manchester or indeed anywhere else. Can the cabinet secretary commit to putting an additional support scheme in place so that tourism businesses do not have to bear the brunt of decisions about travel bans? As Jackie Baillie knows, the Government continues to keep under review business support. The First Minister is going to make a statement in a few moments, which will set out some further developments in relation to the wider context and the strategic framework for the handling of coronavirus. Some of the issues that Jackie Baillie raises will be addressed in the statement that the First Minister will make, so I will not pre-empt that. However, I would say that the Government has put in place a range of different supports for tourism businesses, as with many other businesses, to take people through these difficult times, and we will continue to ensure that we address any issues that are raised by individual sectors to the greatest ability of the financial scope that we have at our disposal. I call Brian Whittle to be followed by Douglas Ross. Thank you, Presiding Officer. Mrs Swinney was here on the media discussing the decisions made by the Scottish Government are now based on vaccination levels and hospitalisation levels, which is contrary to what Nicola Sturgeon suggested, that ban and travel to markets will increase to 100,000. The question is, are the Scottish Government forming the science? What is it? Or are we now just making it up as many of us now think? I am not sure to what extent the cabinet secretary was able to understand that question. All I would say to Mr Whittle's question is that the Government has set out very clearly over many weeks and months the focus that we have had on applying restrictions where it is appropriate based on the development of the pandemic. Increasingly, in the past few weeks, we have begun to focus on the, as vaccination rates have increased, on the relative balance between case numbers, levels of hospitalisation, levels of ICU presence and admittance and the level of cases around the country. As we see the effect of the vaccination programme, that will continue to be the basis upon which we make our decisions, and that has informed the decision-making that the Government has undertaken in this particular case as well. Douglas Ross Deputy First Minister has used on a number of occasions an example of the 24th of May being a reason for a Government-initiated question, and no issues were raised then. Does he know and understand that the 24th of May was a Monday, therefore not a parliamentary sitting day, and last Thursday's decision to use a Government-initiated question was a sitting day, when ministers such as himself could have announced it to Parliament and be questioned by MSPs? All I would say to Mr Ross is that I hear what he's saying. The Presiding Officer has made her remarks. We will, of course, reflect very carefully on the points that the Presiding Officer has raised, because we were in using a Government-initiated question, which are lodged on sitting days very frequently, on many issues in relation to Covid. Many Government-initiated questions on Covid are lodged on sitting days, so we will reflect on what the Presiding Officer has said to make sure that we properly advise Parliament of changes. What I would say to Mr Ross again is that Government-initiated questions are an acceptable means, accepted by the Presiding Officer, of the Government-notifying Parliament of particular developments. We have followed that route, but we will reflect on the points that the Presiding Officer has raised this afternoon. To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to reduce the number of female prisoners on remand following reports that one in four women in custody are awaiting trial. Decisions on bail, remand and sentence in individual cases are, of course, a matter for the independent courts based on the circumstances that are before them. Nevertheless, the Scottish Government has made clear that we believe that the numbers on remand in our prisons, especially for women, are too high. I recognise that an ambition to reduce the use of remand is shared by other parties in this chamber, and I welcome your support and ideas. The single biggest factor in the increase in the proportion of prisoners held on remand is the backlog of cases created by the pandemic, and we are committed to helping the justice services recover. That includes providing an additional £50 million in this financial year so that cases involving all accused, including those on remand, can be progressed and justice can be carried out in each case. A number of actions are under way to help to reduce the use of remand, and at the end of last year, the Scottish Government introduced regulations to Parliament as the first step in introducing electronically monitored bail. Once all of our partners have confirmed their operationally ready, this measure will provide the judiciary with another tool to utilise when considering bail and remand. We also plan to explore how the overarching legal framework within which decisions of remand are made could be adjusted, and in line with the findings of the report by the Commission on Women Offenders by the former Lord Advocate Dame Elish Angiolini, we recognise the disruption periods of remand cause individuals, their families and also their communities, and that is why we are continuing to strengthen the provision of credible alternatives to remand supported by an investment of £550,000 in bail supervision each year. That is in addition to the £107 million invested in community justice services annually, which includes a ring-fenced allocation of £1.5 million of bail support for women. Finally, as part of my new remand, I welcome the opportunity to work across parties and also with key stakeholders and others representing women in the justice system to identify further actions that can help to ensure that remand is used only when necessary to protect public safety and where no appropriate alternative is available. We will require shorter responses as we have a great deal of business to get through this afternoon. I call Pauline McNeill. I thank the minister for what was quite a lengthy response. Time spent in prison can have a catastrophic effect on women's lives, causing them to lose their homes to custody of their children and their job. The Amnesty International reminds us that the detention of individuals for a waiting trial is a matter of special concern because they have yet to be found guilty of any offence and, therefore, innocent in the eyes of the law. Warringly, Scottish prisons have a greater proportion of women in remand in the rest of the UK, and of those women in remand, three quarters will not get a custodial sentence. I hope that the minister would agree that something is not right here. He mentioned that the Scottish Government is about to drop the Angelini report, but that came about nine years ago and there was a proposition that the provision of bail supervision should be consistently available across Scotland. I ask the minister why has it taken nine years to bring this forward. We have been working on going on issues across this area. I would say to the member and also to the chamber that we absolutely recognise how disruptive individuals, families and communities that are periods on remand, should only be used when it is absolutely necessary to protect public safety and where no appropriate alternative exists. I am determined to make progress on this issue, and I hope that the member would accept that we have made progress in this issue and on the wider peace for women and justice. For instance, our work on the presumption against short sentences, our work on the new women's prison estate, our work on electronically monitored bail and our investment into community justice. All of those things are part of a picture, a step forward, if you like. I will look at what more we can do, and I invite the member to work with me in this as well. On bail supervision, as the member requested an update on that, we have invested on bail supervision services. It is, of course, an important alternative to remand. It is run, obviously, by the local authorities, justice social work services, and since April 2019, additional funding of £550,000 has been provided to increase capacity for bail supervision, and the latest statistics show encouraging evidence of impact with the highest level of use of bail supervision in seven years. That is a total of 470 bail supervision cases were commenced, and in 2019-20, that is a 40 per cent increase on 2018-19. It is going to be difficult, atopical questions, if a member, like me, asks a question about remand and I get a whole policy issue that I did not ask about, but what I am asking about is the issue of remand. By the end of April, close to one in four prisons in Scotland were on remand, and that is in the 42.6 per cent of young people aged between the age of 16 and 20 in prison were on remand. 57 per cent of people held on remand do not go on to receive a prison sentence, and they are found either not guilty or receive a community sentence. I am not confident that the Scottish Government really takes on the importance and the human rights consideration. I ask what is the Scottish Government's approach to this in terms of human rights. In January last year, the Scottish Government commissioned research into the reasons behind decisions on bail and remand in order to try and reduce the number of people, but it was put on hold to acknowledge that that was due to the pandemic. Can the minister tell me when this research will be recommenced? I am not sure if I will be able to cover all of my replies, so I follow up with a member if I miss any points out there. We absolutely take that issue very seriously, but I remind the member that decisions on bail are made by the independent courts, and in all circumstances of the case, according to the statutory framework, which explicitly sets out public safety and substantial risks of the person committing further offences. In Scots law, there is generally a presumption in favour of bail, and that is a requirement of the European Convention of Human Rights. I was setting out to the member a wider piece of work that we obviously have to invest in alternatives to remand, and that is what I was setting out to the member the pieces of work that we are taking forward. That is on electronically monitored bail, and that will be implemented shortly. The investment that the Scottish Government is making on bail supervision with money specifically ring-fenced to support women in that, and also our additional funding that we have put into community justice. The Scottish Government, what discussions it has had with the Home Office regarding the reported backlog in processing applications for the EU settlement scheme? It is unacceptable that, with eight days to go to the EU settlement scheme deadline, there is a backlog now of over 300,000 unresolved cases. The Scottish Government has consistently been clear that the deadline should be extended. The Minister for Culture, Europe and International Development wrote to Lord Frost on 16 June, requesting a discussion on the issue at EU Exit Committee meetings. We have yet to receive a response. I also requested an extension when I met with the UK Minister for Immigration Compliance, and we will continue to do everything that we can to support EU citizens, including seeking an extension. I thank the cabinet secretary for his response. The settled status deadline poses huge risks to EU nationals who have contributed so much to our society. It would simply be unacceptable for people to lose their rights overnight. It is of course wrong that EU nationals living here are being forced by the UK Government to apply to stay in Scotland, but given that they have to do so, what steps are the Scottish Government taking to encourage all EU nationals to apply before the deadline? I completely agree with the member that the upcoming deadline poses significant unfair risks to EU nationals. We have continuously requested, at the very least, an extension to the EU SS deadline. Let me be clear that any refusal to extend that deadline is a choice by the UK Government. This Government in Scotland is supporting EU citizens through our Stay in Scotland campaign. We spent more than £1 million helping people to apply to the EU SS scheme through this campaign. That includes media campaigns across radio, digital and social media platforms, toolkits providing information and signposting to be made available to EU citizens. The funding also offers advice and support through citizens advice Scotland, the citizens right project and just right Scotland guidance for the rights of EU citizens. Many key sectors in Scotland, and in particular here in the Highlands, such as hospitality and farming, are already struggling to recruit employees as a result of Brexit. There could not be a worse time to risk compounding that problem if people lose their right to work as a result of the deadline. Is the cabinet secretary concerned that this reckless Tory policy could risk damaging Scotland's recovery from the pandemic? Very concerned that this policy will harm our key sectors across Scotland. It is my view, and that of the Scottish Government that EU citizens living in the UK should not need to apply to retain the rights that they already have had to live, work and study in Scotland. The EU settlement scheme should be replaced with a declarative scheme that automatically allows EU citizens to retain their rights. At the very least, the UK Government should extend the deadline for applying to the EU settlement scheme. Thank you. That concludes topical questions. I regret that I have been unable to take more supplementaries. I would ask colleagues that as we progress through this afternoon's business that we remain courteous at all times to other members in the chamber and please keep responses, questions and responses succinct. The next item of business is a statement by