Dorothy is a Methodist who came to God late in life and her study of the historical Jesus is what led to an awakening experience that initiated her spiritual journey. And she is currently in the process of getting her Masters of Applied Theology from Merrill Hurst University. Dorothy, thank you. It's an honor to be here today. I very much appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. I am a Methodist, but I must stress at the outset that my views do not reflect the views of the Methodist denomination. A key question for us here today is what does spirituality mean? Is an electronically or pharmacologically induced religious experience the same as spirituality? Both may give us a sense of euphoria. Both may allow us to step outside our own egos, to observe our own neurotic behaviors. Both may trigger feelings of unity. So what's the difference?  Spirituality is incorporating insight from peak experiences into our everyday lives. Spiritual engagement is ongoing, allowing access to that part of us that is more fundamental than the I, that which creates the we. It teaches that our lives are interconnected with the lives of others. It reshapes our being so that we strive not simply to repeat the peak experience, but to live up to and into those images of ourselves and others. It is not simply a feeling, but a call to action and interaction. Spirituality is the growing realization that we are connected to all of humanity and that to do harm to others is to do harm to ourselves. The uniting role of spirituality is borne out by science. Neuroscience, with the discovery of mirror neurons and other processes, is beginning to support the idea that empathy is a part of our evolutionary development. We are actually softwired for sociability, attachment, affection, companionship, and the first drive is to actually belong. Through brain research, we're able to see the biological processes underlying our experiences of transcendence and our connections with others. According to the Neuro Revolution, how brain science is changing our world. In studies done by Dr. Newberg, with people having mystical experiences, the conclusion is, it wasn't an either or situation, but rather two different and non-conflicting ways of describing the same experience. Western culture, rooted in dualism, poses false choices between belief systems, such as religion versus science, free market versus justice, and mysticism versus biochemical reaction. We are biological beings, and as such, we experience everything, even our most profound of experiences through our bodies. Because we understand how the machinery works, does not negate the importance of what that experience means. It is becoming clear as we move further into the 21st century that humanity has within reach the ability to alter the body human and to influence the trigger points of life itself. What is less clear is whether our ethical, moral, and spiritual development can keep pace with our technological prowess. While some religious sects still deny the validity of Darwin's great contribution, our scientific and medical communities are bringing about what transhumanists refer to as the next stage of evolution, but which is perhaps more accurately described as human 2.0. It is not so much evolution as industrialization applied to biology. As spiritual transhumanists, we must be very cautious of the symbols, images, and language we use. Referring to evolution and a new species may have an unintended consequence of positioning unenhanced human as inferior and outcast. In looking at evolution, Jeremy Rificense's empathy as a critical aspect of our human development. He notes that we went from blood ties to religious affiliation to nationalism. And currently emerging is the extension of empathy to the biosphere. What we are seeing are two paradigms happening concurrently. The natural evolution paradigm driving us towards one's biosphere that is radical cooperation and the transhuman evolution that without attention to spirituality and its emphasis on interdependence will take us someplace altogether different. Theologian Ted Peters addressing the question of whether or not transhumanism is playing God rights. We play human in the Amago Dei sense. That is, we should understand ourselves as created co-creators and press our scientific and technological creativity into the service of neighbor love of beneficence. Paul Tillich, a Christian existentialist theologian, used the term theonomous creativity to describe creativity in line with the law of God. It is not the technologies that represent the risk. It is how we develop and apply the technologies. I'd like to repeat that. It is not the technologies that represent the risk. It is how we develop and apply the technologies. Living a life of spirit provides comfort in times of crisis, solace in times of loss, gratitude in times of joy. Thanking God reminds us that there is always an element of luck or chance in our good fortune. Spirituality replaces meritocracy with grace. The spirituality debate and transhumanism is currently loudest among the puritanical faith groups on the one hand and the social Darwinism atheists on the other. Both are necessary voices. The puritanical opponents remind us that of the importance of the sanctity of life, but they risk going too far by trying to halt scientific exploration and innovation. It's foolish and it prolongs suffering. The atheists in the transhumanist movement remind us that the importance of critical thinking, the need to live a life without delusions and the power and beauty of the scientific method, but risk dismissing the need for doing the greatest good for the greatest number. That is why this association is so important. It is vital for spiritual transhumanists to have a voice, to be the third way between fundamentalism and creation without God. We are living in times when giving into either or thinking, either science or spirituality can have dangerous social consequences. One suggestion is to encourage faith communities to evolve their perceptions of God and to re-embrace the sacred. Here are just a few reasons why God remains relevant in a transhumanist movement. Andrew Newberg and colleagues and why God won't go away concludes religious beliefs and behaviors turn out to be good for us in profound and problematic ways. Second, it's in our own best interest. The debate about stem cell research, this debate that won't seem to go away, is about the value of life, it is about human dignity. So long as transhumanism is perceived as a threat to faith and to humanity itself, resistance will only grow and evolved spirituality will build a bridge to show transhumanism for what it has the potential to be, the human being, a theonymous co-creator. An evolved theology will help ensure the future we develop is in fact in line with the law of God. The theologian Gregory Peterson argues that while theology is literally talk about God, it is not unusual to speak of the task of theology more broadly as encompassing questions of ultimate concern. Theology asks questions not fully addressed in other disciplines. Why am I here? Where do I come from? Where am I going? Transhumanism poses many bioethical challenges following our three areas where transhumanism bumps up against human dignity and where spirituality would be a tempering force helping us to make the theonymous decisions. First is the advent of humanized animals. For years we have been using genetic engineering to design animals where specific genes have been either added or taken out producing what is called transgenic animals. Transgenic animals are patented and trademarked. Human non-human chimera are created by using a process to add human DNA. These include goats whose milk produces an anticoagulant and other animals whose organs can be used for transplant. These are truly blessings for those in need of the byproducts. Where the issue gets squishy is when we add human neurons to create neural chimera. To paraphrase Bonnetal, how many neurons does it take before the animal becomes self-aware? A second issue concerns the development of artificial intelligence. One question concerns moral agency. Wendell Wallach and moral machines makes the point that we want artificial intelligence to take into account the same values and laws that we expect humans to make when making decisions. Also whose intelligence does AI-AGI reflect? Does it mirror the diversity of personality types and cultural perspectives or does it exclude the values of large segments of the population? A third aspect is availability and access to enhancements. We must realize that as we move further and further into personalized medicine that many, if not most, people will not benefit from transhuman technologies. With the enhanced living side by side, the unenhanced, how do we ensure beneficence rather than indifference, compassion rather than exploitation? Each person and each denomination will need to examine what evolving theology means. For me it includes the following. A move away from religion while simultaneously re-embracing concepts of the sacred. Keeping the concept of mystery but losing the idea of supernatural. God may be larger than our scientific understanding but God is not in opposition to our scientific understanding. For me evolving our theology means putting the wisdom teachings forward and using the stories and personalities only as support. It also may mean breaking away from exclusivity and embracing the vast diversity of beliefs, actions, and places where the sacred is found. Evolving theology reintroduces a reliance on paradox. Morris Berman in Wandering God is studying nomadic spirituality, discusses paradoxes, being able to hold contradictory propositions or emotions simultaneously. It is the opposite of certainty. The role of spiritual guides is to replace dogma with questioning, to provoke seekers to examine their belief systems, and to ask larger questions. Part of evolving spirituality is paying attention to how we image God. God may be imagined within a model from concrete to conceptual. In such a model, God at the tangible concrete end is imagined as an entity, the creator. Humans today are in the role of creator of life with the ability to create new life forms and synthetic DNA. For non-theists, such an image of God sidelines spirituality, dismissing it altogether. If we move further down the continuum, we might imagine God as a force that which unifies the universe and connects humanity with the cosmos. Those who seek meaning from God may think of this as order and chaos, flow, or the rightness of the universe. From a human created standpoint, such a force may be perceived as the singularity, the joining together of human machine consciousness. As we move away from the concrete to the conceptual, God may be perceived as experience. The miracles in the New Testament may be read as exaggerated examples using story form of the ways in which God is expressed in our lives. God moments may be those times when our hearts or minds have been reshaped, transformed. God is that which creates a change of perception. Steven Spielberg showed this in the film, Schindler's List, when he showed Liam Neeson's change of heart by demonstrating one small child wearing a red coat in an otherwise black and white film. The world and circumstances remain the same, but there is a shift within us, within the way we perceive the world that forever alters our lens and changes the trajectory of our lives. It is this ephemeral, intangible experience that will challenge the AI world. We must not only create consciousness, but we must create consciousness that has the ability to experience paradigm shifts in perception as well as intellect.  At this end, God may be imagined as compassion, as agape, selfless love for the other, human dignity, or the interconnected web of life. The root of all faiths, what they all have in common, is the golden rule, do unto others as you would have them do unto you. The need and purpose of God, the one that is enduring and will not become obsolete, is the one that embodies the concept of interconnectedness. Spirituality is needed to engage in a daily practice of checking our own hedonism and our own hubris in deference to something greater. It reminds us that our deficiencies are also gifts. Herbert Mohler, in his work The Uses of the Past, said, Our business as rational beings is not to argue for what is going to be, but to strive for what ought to be in the consciousness that it will never be all that we would like it to be. Transhumanism has not one predestined future, but multiple possible futures and multiple paradoxical futures. The question of whether or not God is relevant depends on which future we are heading towards, which future we are creating, and which future we are embracing. If transhumanism is a movement of the elite, for the elite, then the path is clear. The self-proclaimed super-species will be dominant. By blurring the lines at the bottom end between human and animal, as we are seeing now, transhumanists are in the midst of creating not H plus, but rather H minus. Once the line between human and animal is blurred and human and machine is created, then the morality for treating human sans enhancement becomes one of commodity and exploitation. It is technological empire creating a biological caste system. There is not only no need for God, there is no room for God. If, however, transhumanism is the transfiguration of humanity, a movement that seeks to eradicate suffering that gives equal attention to eliminating the plagues of the developing nations as it gives to cosmetic neurology, then it is in concert with divinity. If it believes the singularity is the tapping of all ingenuity, all knowledge, all gifts, including the Dalit of India, including the artist, including the unenhanced, then God is glorified. If transhumanism seeks to find a way augmented by AI, AGI, and the other tools to develop multiple interacting forms of economic systems, allowing most to thrive at some level above subsistence, then God is manifest. If transhumanism is truly human plus, so that the human potential that is currently laying fallow is uplifted and nurtured, then transhumanism is realizing the vision of the kingdom. God is relevant because God remains as God always was, the whole, the entirety, the unity of creation. So my role here today, among those who are my scholarly and academic superiors, is to ask, which transhumanism are we creating?


Tukaj, Viktor. Hvala, mene količnih in vsi. Veselim, da sem tukaj, da videlem vši sveti, in da sem tukaj izgleda tukaj rečen, da je tukaj, da je tukaj, polizacija, mikroskopija, tukaj medikalima in diagnostika. Nama je, ops, okej, nama je Yuri Ušenko, sem reprezentovat černjevci našeljne universitete v Ukraine. Tako, tudi bomo vse ležite, in v februji 2023 bomo vse laboretory eksperimentalne demonstracije, tudi vse, tako ki smo vse zelo zelo zelo izvizili in izvizili vse, o če so tega. Hvala lektu, in se so različili, z nej, nekaj, izdramatici in izveči, je tako čas. Vse lektu je pričan opravljen, povrčan, stoksvektor, muler matrix in vsega, in basičnih polerimetričnih laserov. V drugi leči smo vzoutovali nekaj basičnih modelov skriptičnih stručov in optičnih in zotropičnih biologičnih tihših. Na drugi leči smo vzoutovali vzoutovali metod in resursi in analizičnih vzoutovali vzoutovali vzoutovali vzoutovali biologičnih tihših polerizacijnih homogeničnih imagičnih. Na drugi leči smo vzoutovali te principali, metod polerizacijnih na prižaeh metod in repliščnih vzoutovali. Speli počkeli iz vseh našipa, vzoutovali私jih nalega. Na vseh tihših nekaj bilo najbolj vzoutovali se priživ center. A to je okreža. Poblada na St sounds, je to centra kaj vstala, všeč ga immersed. Poblada na st, tkoout, bi je dvisno od 1864 kot skela naprej ljubez in ozostrohenerja kot zliz in V tem vseh zelo iznosnje ovo Vršanje, ovo je vsi vseh ispravitv, vseh iznosnje ovo se vseh zelo iznosnje ovo všetih katerom. Vseh zelo iznosnje zelo iznosnje ovo všetih katerom. So let's start with an introduction and we are trying to formulate some basic concepts of what we will talk about. So the first concept is that why we are dealing with optical methods at all. So optical methods of diagnosis of biological objects itself and the visualization of the structure occupy now a leading positions, same to the high information contact and capacity also, and multi-functional capabilities. So you are, you will learn about the photometric methods, spectral methods, polarization itself methods, correlation methods, et cetera. What should be stated is that new scientific direction within optics at all is now formed, it called optics of biological tissues and fluids, and this direction is a rapidly developing thing. The main areas of basic research are the results of theoretical and experimental studies of photon transport from the very beginning in biological tissues and fluids. After that, separate direction in optics of biological tissues and fluids formed by polarimetric investigations. It should be stated that analysis of polarization characteristics of the scattered radiation allow us to obtain additional quantitatively new results on morphological and physiological state of biological tissues. A new step, you may be know about it, lies in the development of methods of optical diagnostics of biological tissues. It deals with the fluorescent techniques and the analysis of polarization state of these fluorescence techniques. So-called laser fluorescence polarimetry or laser after fluorescence polarimetry. Let's start with the light. You know that the light, it's a electromagnetic wave. The electric vector oscillates in, here you can see in X plane, magnetic vector oscillates in Y plane. And the number of, the wave propagation is along to Z axis. In optics, we deals mostly with electric field itself, because magnetic field is some other very wide research area of research. So let's consider the electric vector here, this one. So here you can see it yellow. It can be decomposed on a two orthogonal projection, here sub X and here sub Y. This is, these are two plane waves. You can see the equations of these fields here. It's X component of our electric vector oscillation and Y component of our electricity vector oscillation. It differs by these amplitudes, and here the initial phase is also presented. So, you know, the omega is angular frequency, K is a wave number. And this is a very important thing that a phase, initial phase. The initial phase, yes, it's a time from the beginning of oscillation. As you can see in this figure, what is the initial phase? Zero, zero, yes, exactly zero. But a little bit later, we will discuss it very precisely. So what kind of parameters do we, or can we use in order to make some diagnosis or make some quantification of, for example, scattered light due to this representation. Amplitude can be used for some evaluation. Yes, maybe frequency also phase, including the initial phase. And force parameters, I'd like to present, it's a polarization. Who knows about polarization, what does it mean? Yeah, exactly. It's a trajectory of the tip of this vector when we see, like here. So, about the polarization and the importance of these parameters and the possible realization of diagnostical methods. So, it is, as Bill was said, it's an important property of electromagnetic waves. For example, in communication, completely polarized waves are used. In radio astronomy, unpolarized component exist. And the technique to analyze the polarization known as polarimetry, when it deals with the laser radiation called laser polarimetry. The complete polarization types of electromagnetic waves are the following, it's three types. Linear polarization, circular polarization and the most common type is elliptical polarization. Due to the radiostromical sources they may possess random polarization, also known as unpolarized waves, and the partial polarization. It's a sum or mixture of completely polarized and completely unpolarized radiation. So, it's a very complex situation, so we are not talking about it. So, we will, this lecture we will deal with the classical complete polarization types. Let's start with the graphical representation and the so-called polarization ellipse. So, as we just talking, so the polarization is a trajectory of the tip of electricity vector here when we are looking in this direction. So, when we analyze these two orthogonal components of the electricity vector and do some algebra, it can be done by itself. So, we can obtain these equations. Where's, yeah, sine, cosine and so on. This is a well-known equation of the ellipse. Let's start with the parameters which these ellipse can be characterized. First one is the size of a minor axis. Minor axis, semi-minor axis. The size of major axis here and semi-major axis also oftenly used. The third very important parameter is orientation, so-called tilt angle or ademos of elliptical polarization between this direction x and semi-major axis. The fourth important parameter is the actual ratio, so-called ellipticity of polarization. Is the angle between, let me see, yeah, between the length of the minor to the length of the major axis here. It can be plus or minus, yeah? This is ellipticity angle, very important parameters. Also it can be used as a diagnostical parameter, it's a sense, clockwise or anti-clockwise. So, you know, this electricity vector we obtain ellipse, it's sensing clockwise or anti-clockwise, while wave is distributed forward. On this slide you can see the most easy and the most conventional type of polarization oftenly used in different investigations, it's a linear polarization. It should be stated that any form of complete polarization resulting from a coherent source can be analyzed using the polarization ellipse. For example, or this one, yeah, these two projections, so if there is no amplitude in y, this one is equal to zero. So there is only one component exists, it's x vertical, yeah? If we can return one slide, so when you here place y, yeah? Or x is zero, so we will obtain simple like this oscillation. So in this direction, in x direction, in x plane, here's a propagation direction. It's like the projection of this oscillation on this plane will be linear. Or if there is no amplitude in x component, there is only one component exists, it's y component, yeah? This one. Or this oscillation, it always said it's a linear polarization with azimus is equal to zero here with azimus is equal to 90 degrees. For example, for the plus minus 45 degrees azimus, the phase difference between of these two oscillations or these two orthogonal projection of our electricity vector should be zero or pi for plus and for minus. And the ratio between these amplitudes, they must be equal. So they are equal and the resulting oscillation we can obtain here is plus 45 degrees azimus or minus 45 degrees azimus. So let's start with another case. So it should be noted that linear and this one's circular polarization, it's a boundary states of the most common elliptical polarization. So if we have our well-known two projections, yeah? And if the phase difference initial, yeah, this delta is plus minus 90 degrees and we have this ratio of equality between of these two components, then this ratio is equal to cosine and this ratio is equal to sine and we get the equation of a circle itself, yeah, with a clockwise or anti counterclockwise, your rotation. And this wave is said to be circularly polarized. Yeah, you can see it here. There's a procedure of adding of these two orthogonal components and if we will look here in this direction, we will see circle. Here you can see the procedure of adding of these two components. So we call the phase difference plus minus 90 degrees and this shift is equal to quarter wave between of these two oscillations and when you will do summarization of this vector and this vector and after that this and this, the tip of your summarized vector will be rotating. Here this is. Okay, let's continue with elliptical polarization. So in the most common case, in the most common case, the magnitudes of e, x and e, y are not equal and there is exist a phase difference between the two. In this case, the tip of the electricity vector describes an ellipse and the wave is said to be elliptically polarized. Here you can see these two oscillations, these two projections. The amplitude is not equal between each other and there is some phase shift, not zero and not 90 degree. Okay, and in this case in this direction we will see ellipse. Due to the ratio between of these magnitudes and the value of this phase shift, the rotation could be clockwise or anti-clockwise. Here you can see it. So linear and circular polarization when we can add it gives us elliptical polarization and you should know that any wave may be written as a superposition of the two polarization. Let's see some interesting program. You can download it freely through the Internet. It's called Emanim. So if you have a linear polarization, this one if we have another linear polarization this two wave what should we obtain when we add one to another? Who can? Yes. Exactly. We will obtain also linear wave but in this direction the blue one. Okay, another interesting question. What should we do if these two waves or a projection of one wave will be left and right circular. We obtain exactly because the amplitudes are equal and the phase difference are the same zero. So let's try to show axis only. This blue one and these two vectors are rotating. Let's continue with as we said a few minutes ago that elliptical polarization is the sum of linear and the circular one. Let's check. Yeah, this one, yes. Yes, you can see it. And what we will obtain for example we talked about when the amplitudes of two oscillations are not equal and there is some phase difference between of them. So we should obtain we have to obtain the elliptical polarization. Let's try the amplitude of this one. We make smaller and a little bit phase difference for the second wave. This one the phase difference is very sensitive for a difference. This all I said was about the sensitivity of the ratio between of amplitudes and the phase difference between of two oscillations. So in another wave polarization is very sensitive to any disturbances in these ratios. So the first conclusion so it this tool is very sensitive to the any changes in for example in biological objects. But we should know how to use these changes in polarization in order to make some diagnosis or something like that. So let's start with the stocks parameters. This model experiment you saw it's only calculation. But how one can measure directly from the intensity measurements this polarization and said that this one is linear this one is circular this one is even partly polarized this one is elliptical. So in early 18 52 George Gabriel stocks took a very different approach and discovered that polarization can be described in terms of observables using an experimental identification or definition. So cause the polarization ellipse itself is only valid for a given instant of times. This ellipse is a function of time. With time this ellipse will change. To get the stocks parameters firstly one to time average integral over time and a little bit of algebra also. And one can obtain this equation.  Here we deal now only with amplitudes without time. And these two parameters this one, this, this and this one also he called own parameters the first one it's a sum of amplitudes of these two orthogonal oscillations the second one is the difference between of them. The third one and the first one it's a this kind of combinations with a phase with initial phase also. Okay, let's return the polarization ellipse itself. And how stocks parameters can be described in geometrical terms. Here we are. This is normalized stocks parameters a little bit later about this. The first element is unity in any cases because it's a whole intensity we can divide all the elements on this intensity and obtain this one will be unity. The second one is a combination of cosines where here we are with azimus and this one is what is this ellipticity or vice versa this one azimus this one ellipticity thanks a lot. Okay, the third one and the fourth one because it deals with for example elliptical polarization and we can measure the fourth stocks vector parameters immediately just after that we will obtain the value of ellipticity of our polarization or our wave. The stocks parameters after that can be arranged in the stocks vector. It's not the real vector it's something like in from the matrix calculation so we have a matrix in different dimension and we have a vector it's a matrix with one dimension is unity. So this one is stocks vector this first element is a total intensity of light. The second one how we can measure the second one we should just measure just adjust our analyzer analyzer on the output of our system with angle zero and measure this intensity from a ccd camera from a photo diode from all you want measure respectively just turn out this polarizer analyzer at angle 90 degree and measure this intensity and calculate in matlab as I saw where many people where many scientists are in charge in matlab in very closely charged. The second one this one is a difference between these two components intensity so this one is a measurable quantity just intensity what about the force parameters it's a little bit it's a little bit I can say harder because here we should make this intensity of right circular component and left circular component so in this measurement we should add the so called optical compensator namely a quarter wave plate before the analyzer and adjust analyzer on these angles here and here and also just divide between of them stocks vector elements for a linearly polarization or a linearly polarized wave is the following because we have only this one is unity this one and this one is not equal to zero and the force one is absolutely zero differences between of linearly polarized with azimus of zero and 90 degree is only this one will be unity this one will be minus unity and so on for a circular polarization situation when we have a fully polarized and circular polarized wave the second and third elements are absolutely zero and the force one is non zero for a fully polarized light this equation is in charge here it's divide for example if we deal with a partly polarized light so here will be less not equal but less we just talking about stocks vector so we deal with a field optical field polarization state of this field and so on we can obtain even topological distribution of different polarization when we use a CCD camera and as a detector but what about object what object did this perturbation in polarization states so together with stocks if light is represented by stocks vectors optical components as then should be described with a Miller matrices in such a way this is a description of output light this one is stocks vector of input light in order to do this mathematical operation this one converted to this one we have to use this four matrix called Miller matrix when all these elements connected with an optical property of our object itself so for example for very simple case this one input light output light rhombus some lens and some triangles from different types of glasses this one element one two and three so the transformation of light can be described with this simple equation but this Miller matrices should be written in reverse way you know this is a main formula connected this one also connected with the transformation of polarization and even non-polarized light we can use this as it was said by professor kalve we have to use some formalism we have to invent some formalism in order to predict what is optical properties of object with measured this stocks vector we measure stocks vector of the output after the object we know stocks vector as an input signal for example it's linearly polarized with edimus zero degree and after that we can calculate Miller matrix when different elements different it will be said a little bit later connected with some properties of object it can be bifringens, dichroism and so on absorption so briefly on the basis of laser polarimetry so every polarization microscope allows us to invent for example crystalline objects yes but not everyone give us a possibility to measure all the stocks vector elements in order to calculate Miller matrix so we deal with Miller polarimetry so it can be it can be constructed on the base of conventional polarization microscope but it can be separately collected with necessary optical elements you will see it next Thursday here in order to measure briefly describe laser source it may be not a laser source but wideband source and after that you should use for example some narrowband interferometric filter in order to get some wavelengths you want but laser it's more simple this is a collimator in order to create a collimated beam with needed collimation ratio this one is a first quarter wave plate the task of this plate is only to create a circularly polarized wave cause the laser here for example it can be diode laser yes it linearly polarized and when we after that by means of this polarizer or do some changes in illumination in polarization of illumination beam the intensity will decrease yes and some position so in order to overcome this problem we use this quarter wave plate for example if you have a laser with a circular polarization on the output so ok no problem but this is more flexible system this one this plate put it here provides a condition of circular polarization for the object in order to calculate the force stocks vector parameters object can be slice of histological section it can be dried biological fluid it can be something but this one is for if you want to deal with a reflection mode you only put this part of this setup needed angle and you measure all the same the procedure is the same against quarter wave plate analyzer ccd camera and the processing unit can be so in order to obtain system distribution of azimus and ellipticity of polarization for example it's a so called polarization maps using ccd camera you should only measure minimal and maximal intensity here by means of rotating analyzer 9 it can be done with for example step engines this two arrays minimal and maximal and after that calculate these angles for corresponding angles of this analyzer for this minimal array and after that simply calculate the polarization azimus by subtracting pi divided by 2 and the ellipticity of this ratio of minimal intensity to maximal intensity so it can be done automatically and some automatical polyrimeters exists but not with the ccd camera but for a single beam is only photodiode so let's talk about basics of model description of structure and optical of biological tissues what does it mean optical anisotropy because every biological object almost every except of fat tissue is anisotropic object so optical anisotropy is a difference in the optical properties of a medium as a function of the direction of propagation of optical radiation in the medium and of the state of polarization of the radiation so one can separate amplitude anisotropy so called dichroism and phase anisotropy called bifringence what about amplitude anisotropy so crystals and the biological tissue is a polycrystalline structure may similarly show absorption which depends upon polarization so for different polarization states of illuminating beams absorption will be different one can see the linear dichroism and the circular dichroism linear dichroism it's a dependence of absorption for a linear polarization circular dichroism it's a depending on absorption of circular polarization what about bifringence asymmetry in crystal structures causes two different refractive indices and opposite polarization follow different paths through the crystal one can show the linear bifringence and the circular bifringence or so called optical activity so let's start with some animations just look at the phenomenon we start with linear bifringence and linear dichroism what about linear dichroism you can see that oscillation absorption of red oscillation is much more than for example for the green one it depends on the azimus of polarization what can we obtain this yellow one cube it's a object our medium what we will obtain on the what we can measure on the output of this object cause this too is only projection of the whole polarization yeah so we will obtain something like this strange curve what about circular dichroism so you see also that the green oscillation is not absorbing but the red one is and the output total polarization yeah oscillation on the output of this object will be as follows so we are talking about it's not really in a crystal this one we have some cause any state of polarization any state of polarization can be represented by combination of two or linear one or circular one so in the crystal it can be ordinary extraordinary and this dependence in absorption is evidence ok, what about let's start with linear biafringens this is my so we have these two oscillations on the input and one of them for one of these oscillations the refraction index is a bit higher you can see 1.05 and 1.00 so if I choose the similar refraction index is the situation we were talking about we were talking about in the previous lecture and only just a change a little change in refraction index will lead to creation of elliptical polarization on the output of this object so we can we can we should something do with this in our experiments we should know what we are measuring and what is the process in object brings these changes ok so briefly here you can see a soft tissue structure it's a transmission electron microscope in the skin dermis and this is the model cause every tissue most of them muscular and derma and so on connected with the very first element in this it's a glitzine and predominantly amino acids it forms the tropical again the tropical again forms the collagen fibers and the collagen fibers form fiber bundle so biological tissue reveal self similar fractal structure as a result of growth processes here and the very very fresh publications about multi fractal light scattering in tissues proof this theory in optics express and optics letters here you can see also this one it's fibers collagen fibers and this one also but in this direction ok let's start with the algorithm of mirror matrix modeling of biological layer anisotropy as we can discuss bit later so there are following mechanisms phase anisotropy and amplitude anisotropy divided to optical activity or circular biofringence and linear biofringence circular dichraism and linear dichraism what parameters can we measure we can measure in for this process polarization plane rotation angle sigma and the corresponding partial for this sigma we can measure phase difference phase shift between the orthogonal component of amplitude delta and this partial matrix operator index of circular and linear dichraisms and the corresponding partial mirror matrices this one is mirror matrix M of generalized optical anisotropy of our biological optics this one we measure in our experiments but we should know the influence of this partial mirror matrices corresponding to the different optical activities in this object in order to for example to diagnose the cancer changes on very early stages and so on cause cancer changes on early stage connected with optical activity of molecules so and we can decompose this mirror matrix we should know the processes of the composing of this mirror matrix in order to define these algorithms separately ok just a bit of matrix algebra for circular linear biofringence for circular and linear dichraisms here you can see it these parameters here row this one row is a fibril in the tissue in every point delta it's a phase shift that this fibril brings between of orthogonal component of polarization here the values of absorption so the generalized mirror matrix is as follows this is normalized mirror matrix that's where this element is 0 is unity what about the experiment experiment proof this situation for the skeletal muscle tissue or skeletal muscle you can see this whole mirror matrix this mirror matrix images and no one of this mirror matrix images is not 0 cause it tell us about the presence of whole four processes in biofringences and dichraisms in one tissue at one time but what is the information content of mirror matrix element of all this one how we can decode we can measure this but how we can decode all of these images in order to obtain some necessary information so due to the modeling and so on this one of elements it's a first line this line is connected with mechanisms of optical and isotropic absorption the second and the third line of this mirror matrix is connected with a phase modulation of laser radiation on the background of optical and isotropic absorption so the mechanism presented simultaneously in these elements the last line it's a complex information about superposition of mechanisms of linear biofringence and dichraisms but in several papers about the decomposition of mirror matrices and so on of Lu Chipman and other scientists one can divide some mirror matrix invariance this one and this one are connected only with a with a very high precision connected only with the mechanisms of anisotropic absorption this one m44 connected directly with the phase of linear biofringence and this one delta m is a combination of elements this one difference and the other elements difference between it connected with a tangence of two sigma circular biofringence so how much time? 30 minutes so this is quite microscopic images in polarization microscope of different type of tissue you can see it for example tissue with ordered and disordered structure here you can see this order it's a myocardium tissue in coaxial and crossed polarizer analyzer so you can see that in crossed polarizer analyzer here we can see optical activity light changed polarizationally changed and comes through the analyzer the same for a brain tissue in coaxial and crossed polarizer analyzer this one it's a photographer, ccd image of benin tumor adenoma of prostate gland tissue in coaxial and crossed polarizer analyzer this one is a tissue with benin and malignant formation so pre-cancer malignant formation of cancer of cervix uteri adenoma adenocarcinoma this one is my favorite this one is a blood plasma crystallite blood plasma in coaxial and crossed polarizer analyzer it's a so-called biological fluid and this one is a synovial fluid of a joint with rheumatoid arthritis in coaxial and crossed polarizer analyzer so we deal not only with some soft images we deal with pretty nice images so let's start about what can we do after the obtaining of this pre-cancer matrix elements what is the procedure of processing of these images because image is not a diagnosis and if it is possible to make some objective evaluation, not subjective because you know about the final diagnosis it's a histochemical methods when some very clever man or woman looking in the microscope and said, this is cancer this is not cancer and this one, I don't know exactly but maybe you can see and you see yes, it's maybe cancer okay, the third one, the fourth one and so on so we try to elaborate some objective mechanisms of evaluation so we deal with statistic analysis we have four statistical moments so-called mean value or average standard deviation or dispersion coefficient of skewness and coefficient of kurtosis for example, if we have some what does it mean, will mean value you know, yes, it's a formula standard deviation, it's a disturbances between mean value what is the skewness, skewness it's some like a tilt from left side to right side this is normal distribution, yeah, Gaussian this one with positive skewness this one with negative skewness okay here we have for example, this one is a Gaussian distribution this one is with higher kurtosis this one is with lower kurtosis but the mean value is the same you know this is very sensitive moment this one and this especially kurtosis you get some two images this equal mean value it's quite the same but due to calculation of these higher order moments you can evaluate some differences between of them it can be very small the second one it's a well known correlation analysis and autocorrelation analysis so you know this formula yes, it's a autocorrelation, it's a correlation of signal with itself what can we do with this for example, in order to diagnose so any okay any azimutically asymmetric distribution can be evaluated by correlation analysis in perpendicular direction x and y based on this we use the following methodology of autocorrelation processing for the distribution of values q q it can be stocks vector element millermatrix element and so on your signal here we have two different correlation function half width here you can see it's quite the same, but not the same and this asymmetric coefficient is this divided pmax on pmin this one pmax on pmin gives us evaluation for example we can compare between almost the same image almost the same two images for example with malign information and with normal the half width of the autocorrelation function plays main role okay we have told about fractality of biological tissue also we can calculate the power spectrum density of our images here it's a model image for example for stocks vector of bifringent cylinders this one is two dimensional autocorrelation function and this one is power spectrum density okay fractal analysis is based on the calculation of logarithmic dependencies of power spectra of values q and further mention dependencies are approximated by the least square method in curves f due to the form of this curve this one it doesn't don't show on here but this one it's approximation curve so the distribution is a fractal distribution is a fractal when there is only one stable inclination angle exists within two, three decades of sizes changes distribution a multi fractal when there is several stables inclination angles exist and the distribution are random when there is no stable inclination angles one can use this approach independently of statistic and autocorrelation okay we called these approaches statistic correlation and fractal we call it multifunctional laser polarimetry because not only one parameters are evaluated and described and several parameters can be simultaneously described and when one method is not very good for evaluations, the second one will be much better for example because also this one I want to keep in mind all the data and parameters q presented in previous lecture measured in previous lecture need to be quantitatively analyzed this is the message okay the last one yeah 20 minutes, okay it's more time to the question maybe so principles and methods of polarization and Mueller matrix mapping finally, here this is a Mueller polarimeter so called Stokes polarimeter whatever you want we don't speak about the procedure of measurement of Mueller matrix Stokes vector, yes, but Mueller matrix no the illumination conditions it's a linear polarization with azimus 0 45 degree 90 degree and right circular polarization analysis with respect to azimus analyzer is 0, 45 90 and 135 or it can be minus 45 yeah it's the same and right and left circular using this plate here this is procedure what we will do next Thursday for example, first step set transmission plane of analyzer with angles 0 and 90 degree here measured intensity of zero component here measured intensity of the 90 degree this is a calculation here we can obtain first Stokes vector element and the second one the second step 45 and 135 the analyzer 9 measure two distributions and calculate the third Stokes vector parameters normalized on the first and the third step is measure consist of measuring the fourth Stokes vector parameters and we obtain this one similarly, one can calculate other Stokes vectors for another illumination condition cause here so let the problem beam will be linearly polarized with azimus 0 degree here the whole algorithm this is Stokes vector calculation this is Miller matrix calculation using these Stokes vectors elements and this is the calculation of polarization parameters or so called polarization maps azimus and electricity polarization for azimus polarization you should divide the third Stokes vector element on the second one and do these rectangles the electricity parameters it depends on the fourth Stokes vector parameters here we can see the measured experimentally measured and analyzed three approach Miller matrix invariance optical and isotropy parameters for linear bifringens you can see it here this is a histogram of this distribution and this is a power spectrum of this distribution this is a circular bifringens namely optical activity is analogously situation if you could see here that this one is more regular than this one cause this power spectrum is more linear than this one so even just take a look on this picture this one is linear for Miller matrix elements for linear and circular bifringens with a necessary evaluation of this and here the last table for this is a possibilities of multifunctional polarimetry for evaluation of these Miller matrix elements this is calculated for statistic moments these two and the first statistic moment for the autocorrelation function and this one D is a standard deviation of power spectrum for two groups of patients pre-cancer and cancer states so and you could see that prostat cancer and you could see that here this is a balanced accuracy of the diagnosis these diagnostical methods and this balanced accuracy is on the level of 90 80 75 percent it's quite higher it's near the gold standard due to the histochemical methods thank you for your attention and all the participants are kindly invited to attend correlation optics conference in Chernivtsi in September and this year you could refer this website so thank you once more


So we have the copy with the changes, I wasn't sure if the clean copy, is that still proofers? Yes. Okay. There. Just wait for the column to get back in. Right, so committee and others are probably looking at draft 8.1 with shading to show the changes from the bill is introduced. Right? All the changes together show that, exactly. All the colors. The gray changes show the ones that have been made between the previous draft and the one right now. But yeah, they've been sort of staggered by color. They looked at all of them together. They show the changes to the bill from the language that was in, the version that was introduced, exactly. Great, and committee, thank you for yesterday. I thought it was very helpful to be able to take the time and really go through section by section and understand where folks are coming from. Okay, and so right now it has Ian Martin, but you were mentioning that the file doesn't come to say a... Yeah, the bill is formally in the committee. Right. To come out, it's going to be assuming that it does, that it would be a committee proposal. So a majority of the committee votes for that amendment, then it would be a committee amendment. The phrase now is a strike off. So that strikes everything that was in the bill is introduced. It starts from scratch in terms of language, which is pretty common. The bills that are in here. But yeah, up until now it has been... The post and I miss one or two of us. Exactly, right. So the post and I understand that that process... The proposed committee amendment, the House floor decides first of all, do they accept the proposal's amendment and then do they accept the bill as amended? And if they vote no on the floor, then we'll go back to voting on the bill. I think so, that's a good question. How does that work? On the amendment. Yeah, I think that's right. Yeah, thank you. Great. So, Sir, walk us through. Thank you. Yeah. So as I mentioned earlier, we've moved from the most recent color is gray. So the changes that are... I'll focus us on the changes that have been made between the previous draft and this one. And they are identified by gray highlighting. So you see for just as an example, nothing to look... In section one, the fall proceed because the highlighting is yellow and blue. Still remaining at the 30-day proposed default proceed, no changes there. So you move on from there to the relief and abuse order section. You see the entirety of section three is struck through. This was the language that created a new criminal offense for a person impeding a public officer. And you see that's the new language was line eight to 13 subsection B there. It had created a new criminal offense for being present at a location where a search and seizure was going on or removal of a firearm pursuant to a relief from abuse order. And if you refuse to obey the instructions of a law enforcement officer to ensure safe removal of firearms or protect safety, that was a new two-year misdemeanor. So the proposal was to create the two-year misdemeanor for a person being in that location and this new draft strikes that provision completely. Good sound testimony. Right, right. Everyone okay to move on from there? So that section is gone. Then you move on to this is section 1103, which is the final relief from abuse order stage, final RFAs. The contents of the order itself are very similar, but you'll see that there are some changes when it gets down to relinquishment. This is the issue that's been discussed. Is the relief from abuse order going to order relinquishment of firearms? And there have been committees gone through several iterations of under what circumstances relinquishment would be ordered. So if you look at subdivision four there, this is if the order does require relinquishment. Because remember, it won't always. It's depending on what sort of evidence has been presented. But if it does, then these provisions have to be included in the order. So room number one there, you'll see that it's sort of a different phrasing of that sentence that we discussed last time I was in here just to make it more clear that the information available to the court is what's got to be in this initial order for relinquishment. It's because there have been some confusion about, well, does available information, does that really give the court enough direction to be clear that you're not asking the court to go outside whatever information it has. It's just whatever information is available to the court at that time. So that's the change made on line 18. Now, you see it's a new language, a partially new language here in Roman numeral two. I'm just going to skip down real quick so you can see that part of it is just moved. The second, actually it was originally in the emergency order only. I'm just going to really quick skip down if you can look up back on the wall if you want to. But if you look down on page ten, lines nine through eleven, in the previous version you looked at the emergency order had to include some information letting the defendant know that third party storage of firearms is not permitted unless the court has made these findings that are in title 20. That's this existing law that governs how firearms are stored when their C's pursuant to an RFA. And there are certain findings the court has to make because ordinarily the firearm could be stored at a law enforcement agency, but a person can get a third person who they know who could safely store the firearms. That is an option but the court has to make these findings about safety. So this is just articulating that providing notice to the defendant that you can do third party storage but the court has to make these findings first. So it's struck here but it's not removed from the bill, it's just removed elsewhere. That's still, you still have that language but slightly modified in the emergency relief on page nine, is that right? I was just going back to that, exactly. I was just pointing out that it struck here but not struck from the bill, just moved elsewhere as you were getting at. So yeah, it modified the language slightly because I think it's really part of the same piece of information that the defendant's getting. It's all related to this existing law in title 20 that sets forth how it is firearms are stored once they get seized and that's already existing and both these issues were related to that. So you see lines 20 through 21 on page six and lines one through two on page seven covers both of these things. So if the order requires relinquishment, again this is about information that has to be provided to the defendant. And that's what the defendant knows is that what are the provisions of title 20 section 2307 regarding where the defendant is permitted to relinquish firearms. In other words, let the defendant know that you have these options. The law enforcement agency, cooperating law enforcement agency can store them. There's a second option that I'm not remembering for some reason but the third option is private storage by a third person and we'll have to make some affirmations to the court that it's going to be safely stored by that person. If they can do that, then you have this third party storage option. So these options have to be provided to the defendant. They have to let them know, hey, because when you think about it, at the time of relinquishment it makes some sense to let the defendant know these are your options for storage. Here's how it could be stored. But, and this is a slight tweet to the language I just pointed out that was struck in one place, moved to here. But to include notice, this is lines one and two, page seven, include notice that third party storage is not permitted unless the court has made the findings required by title 20. I think the point there is, you know, you want to let the defendant know you had these options but make sure the defendant also knows that third party storage requires some court findings before it can go forward. Eric, I have a question. I'm sorry if you've already covered it. Yeah. So at the top of page six, line two, where it says the court order shall, if there is evidence that the defendant possesses, owns, or controls firearms, require the immediate relinquishment. But then there's also the other situation now on line 17 where it says if the order requires relinquishment of firearms. So, will all orders require the relinquishment of firearms? Because it seems implied in line 17 that there are situations in which the orders wouldn't require relinquishment. That's right. If they didn't own firearms. Right. If there is no evidence, in that line three you were just pointing out, if there isn't evidence that the defendant possesses, and those are controlled, then I think the idea is there's no reason to order relinquishments. Okay. Thank you. Sure. So this is another provision of information providing to the defendant during the order if relinquishment is required. Similar, sorry, no changes to the language from the previous draft that requires defendant to relinquish firearms. So this is specific if the order requires relinquishment to actually let the defendant know that you have to turn them over. And as well provide law enforcement with some information about the firearms. This is lines five to 11. Remember, this is talking about the location, production of keys, combination of blocks, et cetera. And there's some new language there saying that so you provide this information unless firearms are turned over without requiring law enforcement access to such locations. I think the idea there is if they turn them over voluntarily essentially. There's no reason for the defendant to also have to produce location information, combination of blocks, that sort of thing. So just really quickly, because that language we didn't have a chance to look at yesterday when we were discussing this, but I worked on that later to try to address, unfortunately Matt, not with us any longer. The concerns that Matt was raising is sought to address the concerns that Matt had. Representative Treber, former representative Treber. That's it. The way it was phrased it sounds. It's a remurder, Mr. Treber. It was the dog. You see another conforming change here. We'd already talked about this issue yesterday. Actually, this is just a couple of places where the word owns hadn't been struck. We missed it on this time around. Remember the idea there is that we're talking about requiring relinquishment of firearms or information about firearms that the defendant has. In some situations it would also be information that somebody else has on behalf of the defendant, but they wouldn't own the firearm on behalf of the defendant, so that's why that word is struck there as well as in a couple of other places which you had already seen yesterday. So that's it for the final order. Now moving on to the emergency order. Remember this is the ex parte order, not even the presence of the defendant, typically. And I think the changes you'll see here are just the same as what we looked at now. I'm aware that just now with respect to the emergency order. Again, this here that you see on lines 9 to 10, again, moving the language around with respect to available information just for clarity to make sure the court's clear. This doesn't mean they have to reach out to try and find other information. This is only about the information that is available to the court at that time. And to make clear that the information includes type number and location of firearms. That was in the final order already, but I think it was just an oversight that it wasn't repeated here. The word number I mean. So Eric, can you say more about, I know we had heard from people about their concern about ex parte. There are times that a judge won't do an ex parte hearing, right? And there are times that they will. Is that only when the law specifies or is it related to safety? I think generally speaking, people have a right to be heard. So the court is inclined to have parties whose interests are being decided by a judge to be represented or at least their prosa. In one way or another, they're allowed to be present. And you have to be constitutionally if your rights are going to be communicated. So there are some exceptions to that. And those are either set out that have been found over time, but typically are in statute. So like this, for example, where there are certain times when a civil commitment proceeding can be ex parte. There are times when property seizures can be ex parte. But usually to conform with due process, you have a right to a hearing within a reasonable time afterward. Courts have kind of varied about how much time is reasonable, but 14 days definitely is at least under the court decision. But it's set out in statute that the hearing will be ex parte, but you have a right to be there and be present since your interests are being affected within a certain amount of time after. But is there sort of a standard of proof that's used for when to use an ex parte? I guess I'm wondering if it's not in statute, and you said sometimes judges will decide, is it this is related to something bad will happen if the defendant were in the room at that particular time they would destroy evidence, they might hurt somebody? I don't know of anything articulated that's sort of a general rule as to when there can be ex parte hearings, but I do think that if you looked at them, yes, you would generally see that there's some kind of immediacy required for some reason, whether you think of the ERPO, for example, as an ex parte provision, immediate treatment, medical treatment sometimes can be ex parte, or this here, RFA, if you look for some sort of connecting thread, it's some time sensitive immediacy. I don't know that that's ever been, it may have been, but I'm not aware of any place that that's set down as the rule, but it does seem common. Thank you. And this law has been on the books quite a while, the RFA. Yeah, quite some time. Right. It seems like people keep raising ex parte, and it just seems like the better I understand it, the more I'm equipped to... Yes, right.  Yeah. It's been on the books for quite a while. So, you'll see the language on 11 to 14 is exactly the same language that you just looked at in the context of the emergency order. This is the same concept in the, sorry, that we just looked at in the final order. This is the same concept in the emergency order, which is providing defendant information about how firearms that are relinquished are stored, and what the options are for storage, and what the requirements are, particularly with respect to third party storage. Same language as you just saw. Also here, another example of just repeating language that you already looked at in the final order context. This is the point about not requiring information about locks, locations, et cetera, if the defendant has voluntarily turned them over. So, real quick, just back to the question Barbara had. In section 1104, southern section 81, which we don't have in the bill, it says upon finding that there is an immediate danger for abuse. So, there is the immediacy requirement for the last part. Thank you. We already saw this as well. This is the, as I find out, the language about informing the defendant about their storage options was struck here, but moved up above. Another example of striking the word owns from a language about someone else holding firearms on behalf of the defendant. Section four is the new crime. No changes there. The new crime for a person being possession of a firearm whether it's subject to an emergency or a final relief from abuse order. Now we're getting into the service section, which is next, and warrants. Again, no changes in here between what we looked at previously. This is talking about the return of service form, what the contents have to be in the return of service form that was brought back to the court after the order was served. You see there's a spelling correction, line 20, filed, used to be healed. This is more about related to the contents. This is, and seeing the different colors, these weren't changed to the previous draft. They'd been amendments that were made previously. So again, there's a reference. This is in connection with the service of the orders and the return of the service, the return of the return of service to the court. There's some language about law enforcement, officer and agency immunity. It means they can't be sued or prosecuted criminally for acts they take or omissions that are made from a good faith reliance on what the law requires in this sub-chapter. You see that clarification is made on line one, page 16. So it's not just actions that they take under that section of law. It's any sections in the sub-chapter, which all deals with the relief from abuse orders and the related issues. So when the officer relies on those provisions in good faith, then they can't be sued for something they might have done or not done. There's some minor language tweaks in these immunity provisions. This is an enumeration of some of the things that they can't be sued for. It uses the word including. You see on line two, including does not mean limited to. These are some illustrative examples of what constitutes conduct that they can't be subject to law suit for. So some clarifying language there. They can't generally be sued for returning a Caesar or a linkage weapon if the person is not prohibited from owning or possessing under state or federal law. Also clarifying that they're immune from any damage caused while accessing or removing the firearm. So it's not just finding it. It's also removing it, taking it away. Now you see subdivision B there is struck entirely. That's because that actually is repetitive. It just repeats language that already exists in the same firearm storage section that I was mentioning earlier, the one entitled 20. That language is already there. The reason it was there is because it was in the bill as originally introduced before all this new immunity language was added. So once all this new immunity language was added, this is no longer necessary. Previously you'd struck some of these reporting requirements. They're gone. The definition requirements are not new, but they actually are moved in placement. They're moved to the end of this section on it really from abuse orders. It just seems to make more sense to have the terms defined afterward when you're presenting them. So I was wondering, actually, if it made more sense for me earlier in the process or earlier in the bill. And I guess in question, even on your question. Where it was before, you mean? Yeah, if we were to do that, does this have to become graph 9.1 or has that changed since it's not really substantive? I'm just curious. Yeah. If we were going to move it back to the starting point. Ordinarily you would because it's going to require renumbering much of the other sections. Right. But it doesn't matter where it is. I thought you had to move it here. Yeah, I think the, I put that together with the MP when we were still talking. Right. He taught us all that. Right. Can you explain your thinking in terms of drafting and being here? Just tell us more about how, why, why did you get the flow this better here? I don't have a good opinion on that. That was just about the request. I did not have a clear communication. It's my fault that it moved here. Okay. Sorry. That's where it should. If you were putting it somewhere, our convention would be to put it in the beginning. Right. Just because numerically, that's where it comes in the statutes. That's right. Right. Right. So, so do you want to move it back? Well, we'll get on to both of that. Okay. So, section seven you'll see is new. And this is the language that I think was discussed in committee yesterday. I hadn't actually been in the bill yet, but Representative Hashim and I had worked on some language to, and this sort of is related to the removal of the criminal offense. Remember, there was a, the criminal offense of hindering, it's related to the hindering statute that made it a new crime for someone to not obey a law enforcement officer's order at the scene of the service of a domestic violence and RFA order. So, since that's gone, the proposal to add here is that just to clarify that, that the sub chapter is not going to in any way limit or affect the existing law enforcement officer authority that they have under existing law and procedure, including any lawful authority to control the movement of individuals at a scene in the interest of protecting safety. So, whatever authority an officer has now to manage a scene, in fact, that's just one example. As you see the way it's phrased, nothing in this sub chapter shall be construed to in any way limit or affect the authority of an officer under existing law procedure. So, any authority is not limited by this sub chapter, anything to do with the RFA's or the service or the return of service, any of that. So, existing law stays as it is. It's the clarification there. So, thank you. So, if that's already existing law, why do we have to add it back in here? I think it's one of those situations where it's probably not legally necessary, but sometimes it helps to highlight something. So, I think I agree with you if your point is, is it legally necessary? No. It would be interpreted that way by a court anyway. But sometimes you choose, and against your policy choice, sometimes you choose to put something in law to highlight a point or to make something clear to a reader in a given place because without it being expressly written there, a citizen who reads a lot might or might not know them. Thank you. Now, so the, everyone okay? And we'll go on to the IRPOS, Extremist Protection Order. So, this is an easy one to explain. So, this section is struck entirely. You'll see that for a while the two proposals that have been involved here, there were two things going on. I shouldn't say it's not struck entirely. There's one piece at the end we'll get to. But the two pieces related to adding household, family and household members to the list of folks who could petition for an Extremist Protection Order. That piece has gone as is the language that the committee had discussed about if you were going to have family or household members permitted to file for an IRPOS, then in the case of an emergency IRPOS, they could only file it based on risk of harm to another person.  And there's also the after, no after hours, I mean it was becoming. Right. So, the piece related to IRPOS that is still in here, you'll see is section eight. And that is the same language that was in the bill that was vetoed by the governor last year. And that is permitting healthcare providers to let law enforcement officers know when they think a person is a danger without violating federal medical record privacy law. So, that has been unchanged since the bill has been introduced and is actually, as I say, unchanged from the bill that was vetoed last year. Conditions of release prior to trial stays the same, adding a provision that conditions of release include requiring the defendant not possess firearms or other weapons. No changes to the reporting requirements or the effective date which remains July 1, 2020. On the button. Yeah. Yeah. I couldn't find it myself. Can you just point me to the section where it highlights that the defendant can get their hearing, get their hearing within 14 days? Or, yeah. This probably may not be. I think it's in the underlying, probably not in the bill in front of you. 1103. 1104. 1104. I was looking at 1104. Yeah. So actually, I was, Eric, I was going to ask you to walk through the entire bill again. Good. I was going to ask for a section so that might cover it. Yeah. Because, you know, we've been focusing on the changes from draft to draft, and I think it would be helpful to just walk through the entire bill. And so some of, so some of the, you know, folks are thinking, I think we'll come up and we'll walk through. So we're going to walk through the clean copy? Yeah. We'll say we should probably walk through the clean copy. Which one? Do we, you know, have it, right? It's still the first thing we have to do? Right. This might be a little less confusing. Not as daring to stuff that's crossed out. Yeah. I should bring up more questions. I don't remember why that would be. Okay. Do we know when that would... I think there were 11. Okay. Okay. So we have the joint assembly, which is quite quick, because there's some contest for you. It's at 10.30. We already called for 10.30. But I think it should be quick. So if we can come back here. You know, 11.15, 11.30. If we don't get off the floor until quarter 12, then we can finally come back and regroup. But let's try to come back here and do a walk-through. You know, with a clean copy. I think there's two candidates in two positions, so there shouldn't be too much debate. Don't we still have to have people be the vote counters and everything? Probably, but hopefully they do one. Okay. Okay. You know, one ballot. Yeah. So. Okay. So can I ask a quick question? Yeah. On this 14-day, I've just been standing through 11.04. And I don't see that it... Oh wait, I just voted that. Yeah, it's 11.04. The 14-day... Sorry, no question. This wasn't the meeting. Sure. Okay. So we're going to take a pause at 6.10. Do you want me to shoot you an email when it's ready or do you just want to plan on a certain time just after the joint assembly? Yeah, let's try to get back here as soon as possible. After 4.00? Okay. But right after 4.00? No. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. And then we need Eric to... No, I think we just have to decide what we're going to do. Listen up. Ask Eric. Okay. Great. So... So we have some... to... I mean, right now. I'm 79. I'm 85. Great. Great. So... Yeah, you know, that's one of the... there's a few things I just wanted to see where the speed was... in rule of law. So... So look at 579, 580. There's a few things I just wanted to try to give you about some... temperature, shack, source, team, opportunity. One is combining them into one and I'll let Eric decide what ever is the easiest so that... we'll either have just 582 or 579. Next time we'll look at it. Looking at what is currently 579, I'm going to ask Eric to put back in there the transitional position provisions based on our conversation that we had whatever that was last week. So... And then on 5... What? 580. Just a quick explanation of what that... Good. The point of the transitional piece is to say that... for those crimes that haven't been categorized in law by... it would be July 1st of... of 2021 that this is how they'll be treated but there's a context of the whole scheme. The idea is right now the sentencing commission is digging through the rest of the crimes and recommending where we categorize them. And... presumably, we'll take that up at the beginning of next May... May I add in more feathers in this room? We'll take it up in the next May. And it essentially gives a deadline that you need to get this done by next session or this transitional period or transition scheme or schematic will go into place. So that's the concept. So... going to 579, I think there's really maybe one issue and I'm going to propose and I think I have time on board with this is the felony threshold and this would be... 2000? Go back 100. Oh, I thought... It was the answer. It was 3000. Do I hear... do I hear 2500? No, no, no. Don't hurry. We could pay them when they come in. So 3000 dollars will be the threshold that will take you into a class E felony which is three years and I still would just have the 100,000 dollar value would stay the same for the level for a class D felony. So that's the suggestion I'm going to make there and I think that's it. It's the combination putting back the transition and changing that felony threshold. So moved. So I mean... Oh, there's none left. Any big issues with that? I mean we're not voting or anything now but I just, before I instruct Eric if there's anything more to talk about. You're going to combine? Can you just remind me again about the rationale that we had for making it 3000? Was it to match up with the other states? It was to not get too far ahead of the other states. The other state is 2500. It's still 3000 because other states are considering using the thresholds. Ten thousand would have been really good. Remind me how many... Is draft 1.1 the last revision we've seen of this? So can you say the... I'm sorry, could you say the... Are you changing the... So the version I'm looking at has the felony structure plus a 500,000 the 2500,000 C... So I'm just trying to square that with what you said about... Which bill? 580? Yes. Sorry. I apologize. Which bill you want? It's why it's good to combine. That's the whole thing. Going back and forth from bill to bill. Which one are you looking at now? Well now I'm looking at the right bill. Yeah. It would be helpful to see... To see... It would be helpful to update that chart on just the right... Just this chart that buckets all the crimes in a table form. Yeah. Just to be able to look at it more more... ... struggling to process things go herrally. Right. I will get the chart... I might even ask for anything in this... Yeah. Hi. Can we just go and get these combined and then discuss it? I was just asking questions to see just because that's the goal is to have one bill. Yeah. Actually, we've never looked at them separately. One bill and I would get this chart that is in the record nation will update what we change. Yes. We'll have that information in the form of discussion. And I'm hoping that we can go that way now. Really next week and I think that hangs out over next week. I'm hoping that there's that... I am starting to feel it crossover. French. Sometimes it's... 13. So as well as that leak actually come back, which is tricky. I kind of like it before that meeting to leave with you. What day is it? June 13. Friday. Friday. I'm sure. Friday. I'm sure. Friday. I'm sure. I'm sure. I'm sure. I'm sure. I'm sure. Oh, yeah. Are we to spend more time on the act 215? Stop. I don't know. I don't see what you're... Okay. Interestingly enough judicial retention last night we have the... The female lawyer that was in here last night late. And she came back to when we were meeting. Oh, yeah, that's right. Yeah, that's right. And the rest of the room, but, yeah, so. Well, she said, since the three of you are here, can I talk to you? And basically, we said, look, we have Matt for, Matt said, like, this is my last day. So they dismissed him. And I said, you've got to get this appropriations memo done, and then I have to leave. And coach or smartness, like, kept focused this way, so they reluctantly left. But then somebody else came in who had concerns, who was just a citizen. And saying, like, I've asked to testify. I don't know why. I can't, I'm like, you know what? I don't know what's happening in the other committees. And we don't have a possession. We have a narrow focus. I don't understand. I don't think I really understand what that means. I mean, right. I have a possession of just a little narrow, a few pairs, basically. I do think it would, Tom and I were thinking the same thing. I think last night, we were actually having an environmental court judge up for attention. And we could have one of the two judges testify briefly just to understand. Jenny, I don't think that's really Judge Gershwin's job. Yeah, that would be fine. I mean, we could ask. If we could take more just more, we could ask, but yeah. Because I didn't talk to him last night a while ago about the judge. I just feel like that would be more information than what we've got, frankly, to weigh in on it. So I can seek that information on my own. Yeah, I can ask the extra judge. I mean, it's appropriate. We didn't really have any time to weigh in on anything on that. We really didn't have time to weigh in on anything on that. Yeah, no, we haven't discussed this yet. We haven't looked at the testimony. I just feel like I need more information. But I can, if I'm an outlier and not I don't seek it on my own. I don't figure an outlier needing information. I think it's the process. Generally, individual judges have the environmental personally different because it's a dedicated court with two dedicated judges. But generally, Judge Gershwin will pull the judges to come to us and talk to us. Sort of bringing up the pepper. We often don't see the individual state's attorney. We might, but I don't know. I feel like I need to pose that question. I need to brush it in. Because he didn't have a, I asked him about the bill and first thing he said, he said, I've got no opinion on the policy. Right. But you can't. Right, which was, what he did talk about was the way the system used to be. And in some issues or the way that the system used to be that there was some cases that ended up in two courts. And then in the end, both courts came up with different decisions. So then they had to start all the way over again. And I'm not saying this isn't exactly what he said, but the way I took what he said is that there's some similarities going to, with this new policy that goes back to the way it used to be. Right. And he kind of alluded to that he has some concerns that something like that might happen again. One person that, the citizen that talked to us said, in Montpelier, a lot of people got elected to the city council and are pushing their projects and things are sort of taken away from citizens. And he was worried that the state board would be very political. He was like, yeah, okay, yeah. And I was like, okay, this isn't out of my... The town appeals will still, I mean, there's certain, if you look at the chart that they shared, there's a lot more detail there about the natural resources for, actually, will there's some appeals with like a town permit appeal would still go to environmental court. Right, right. Right, which has has. So that's not, except for some very minimal, I mean, I think they can hear really minimal appeals. But didn't downtowns get exempt or something from the appeals? Yeah. From Act 50. Yeah. So that was the right, that's the issue. Yeah. That was the issue. That was the whole right. And that's not argumentative. No, yeah, no. But I don't know what to comment, I mean, it'd be nice to say, like if it got so chopped up that every committee just looked at a little bit, but nobody's looked at the whole, natural resources. I mean, it's assuming they did. Just spent a lot of time in Vienna. Yeah. So it would be great if they kind of gave us a thank you or something, I don't know, or if we're supposed to tell people to contact them if they have concerns. I mean, yeah, everything is. The contact tools. Natural resources.  Right. Right. Right. But I know this is supposed to be on the floor next week. Wow. Yeah. Yeah. And I think the angry attorney was like, I'm gonna start fighting it on the Senate side. Right. And that's what she was saying. You know, that's what she was saying. This is probably a good approach. Yeah, I mean, that's right. Right, I mean. Yeah, at this point. Okay, you're not. You're about done a little bit over here. Right. I do just, I mean, I'll dig into the bell and maybe come up with some more specific questions, but I do just feel like I want to understand the implications more of which appeals now go to the board, which appeals kind of something important how the nature of those reviews might change. Right. I think it's significant. Right. Because we went through that at exit one. And it was, it was. Oh. The thing largely was, yeah. And it really, it's good to have clarity about the process. And I think that the chart that she put together helped to do that. But that's not necessarily within our, within our purview, but a better understanding of the process is always, is always good. I mean, I felt like the overall theme that we were hearing from the voices yesterday was somehow that the people's voices taken out of the process. And so I don't feel like I could. Yeah, I mean, it's interesting because I think the kind of thing we talked to some people will say that their voices are taking out of the process right now. And then environmental, that the environmental court is really lawyer up. Yeah. And other people, I think. Right. Do you think the lawyers would like it then? Is it's like more? Some people say the lawyers do like the current system. Right, yeah. I don't know. Right. Yeah. We will definitely have, if that's the buzz, like constituents will definitely ask that and it would be nice to, as Linda said, like know what we're talking about. Yeah. That's pretty intense.  Just didn't stop. And it didn't stop. You know what I mean? That's what she came back to sort of. Turned my back on somebody. I mean, I really, I didn't know how to, I was trying to end the conversation. I really needed to talk to you. You know, we, it's my meeting. We had a hard time with her when she, I mean, she was definitely not as in our face, but it was, she was in your bubble. She was more aggressive like this, though. She was aggressive. Yeah. She was a little aggressive. Put a smile on her face. Yeah.  Yeah. They all are, all attorneys. Well, she's the best. So, right, so I guess we're, we're having a fight.