Patrick Beja is back. Oh good Lord. I can't believe it's finally happened. How's it going Tom? It's going well. How was your vacation? It was nice. It was full of nature and trees and the sea and all sorts of things that I don't usually get to experience. Did you do any dipping in the fjords? Well not in the fjords, but actually we had a mid-summer evening with lots of friends and we had a bonfire in the middle of the night and at some point there might or might not have been a skinny dipping fiesta. Interesting. A mid-summer night's a dream. It didn't last long because it was freaking cold. It was the coldest June in Finland in like 20 years. All right, well let's get this going here. Are you ready for some French to welcome you back? I was born ready for some French to welcome me back. This is the daily show of technology. Today is Patrick's Tuesday. If you would like to support DTNS, go to patreon.com.au I was born ready. I really missed all of you guys and the show and the chat room and the audience. Actually it's been, I think in two weeks I haven't listened to the show even and that's really been weighing on my soul. So I'm really glad to be back in full action. Well with that in mind I'm going to go back and read all the headlines for Patrick to catch him up. No, just kidding. That's why we make him available on demand. Let's start off with today's headlines. The BBC has announced the BBC Micro-Bit. It's a pocket-sized, codable computer. TechCrunch says the Micro-Bit features 25 red LEDs, two programmable buttons, an onboard motion detector, accelerometer, a built-in compass, Bluetooth smart technology, five IO rings to connect the Micro-Bit to devices or sensors using crocodile clips or four millimeter banana plugs. In fact you can plug it into an Arduino or a Raspberry Pi. BBC Micro-Bit is programmable by software on dedicated websites. You can use a browser to connect to it, microbit.co.uk and you can access that from your PC or tablet or your mobile which gives it some flexibility for programming. Up to a million devices will be given to every 11 or 12 year old child in year 7 or equivalent across the United Kingdom for free and then the BBC's non-profit organization that made the Micro-Bit will license the design to third parties for third party manufacturer. I have ambivalent feelings about this. Do you? I actually do. So I come back first story. I'm the Grinch on the show. Sorry about this. It's not like the break was often about folks. Actually, apparently not. So it's not like I think this is a bad thing. It's just that there's a movement currently that says, ah, kids have to learn to code and have to learn about the inner workings of computers so important and I'm not saying it's not the case but I think they would be much better served if they learned about practical things on the internet like data privacy and how to actually use Facebook and what it means when something is on Google and how to, you know, set their data, you know, how to handle their data and sure some of the kids that are currently being initiated to programming are probably going to be interested in that as well but I'm not sure this is the best way to get computers in schools. Don't you think that you would have a better understanding of those issues if you know more about how computers work though? That's my thought here and I know you're not saying that the Micro-Bit is a bad idea. I know that. It's just that I don't think this is the best way of, so to take an analogy, it's like if people need to understand cars, how, you know, to understand traffic, do you want to teach them how an engine works or do you want to teach them the traffic rules? And I think that's the... Well, okay, fair enough, right? You don't need to understand how a car works to obey the traffic rules but you might understand a lot more about traffic and how it operates in safe following distances and why you need to drive safely if you understand a little bit about how it works. I agree with you that it can be taken too far, right? And not everyone's going to be good at coding and kids shouldn't be forced into learning coding any farther than they should be forced into learning any particular subject but I think a little basis in how coding works and how hardware works is sorely needed. I don't think we're to the point where we need to actually pull back and say, okay, stop forcing kids into something they're not good at or not interested in. I think the opposite. I think kids who are interested and are good at this aren't getting the opportunities yet. So I feel like this is the right thing to do at this point. Fair enough but they're giving them to every single kid in that age group and in those, you know, some of them we need it but all of them actually need to use that Facebook. Everybody wins. Cool. Bloomberg reports Samsung's operating income fell 4% in Q2 to 6.9 trillion won, missing analysts estimates. Samsung Galaxy S6 sales were disappointing and 6 edge shortages could not keep up with demand. Operating profit in the consumer electronics division dropped likely due to decreased demand for TV. Earnings from the semiconductors unit was about 3.2 trillion won. So the stock actually rose on this news which I found quite interesting. I think the idea is that while Samsung is getting squeezed from both ends on the smartphone front, both on the cheap end and on the high end by Apple, people saw in this that the real problem was manufacturing shortages and Samsung seems to have a credible plan to address that. Semiconductor units are doing well. It looks like Apple is probably going to buy Samsung chips for the next round of iPhones which would be a boost there and everyone expects the TV divisions operating profits to decline so that's no surprise. So really it's not a great report for Samsung. I know it's the seventh straight quarterly decline but if you're going to have a bad report, I feel like this is the right bad report to have for Samsung. The best worst, the best bad case scenario. The Verge reports that Microsoft is offering $500,000 grants that come with a pair of HoloLens dev kits. They basically want to see independent groups come up with ideas for HoloLens. Things like computing with data visualization, mixed reality, arts installations, teaching applications. Microsoft is going to accept submissions through the beginning of September with university and non-profit researchers eligible for the grants and awards to be announced in October. Now what do you think of this one? So I'm going to put a positive spin on it because I'm not the biggest fan of the HoloLens either. I do think that if you want to find a use for the HoloLens, that's probably the way to go about it. The HoloLens is something very strange that looks very, that is very seducing as an idea, as a fantasy but uses for it are going to be very difficult to define and to nail down. And this is a great way to address that, right? Exactly, exactly. PCMag.com reports that Samsung announced two terabyte versions of its 850 EVO and 850 Pro SSDs. The new two terabyte versions use Samsung's 3D vertical man technology and have the same 7mm and 2.5 inch aluminium case as their predecessors with plans to expand the lineup to include M-SATA and M2 form factors in the future. The two terabyte EVO is priced at $799.99 while the Pro version will set you back $999.99 and is available in 50 countries. I know that I am an outlier when I say this but I always want the biggest freaking hard drive I can get my hands on and I want a flash drive these days. So a two terabyte flash drive. I know this one's not available for laptops yet but a two terabyte flash drive in my laptop which is now coming soon just makes me slobber a little, to be honest. I've been using Samsung hard drives the previous version the 840 EVO for a few years and I'm super, super happy with it and I'm actually considering changing hard drives and getting a one terabyte version and that seems like a big investment but I'm telling you guys, anyone listening to my voice if you don't have an SSD in your machine yet this is the biggest upgrade you can put on your PC and I would not live without it. I walk down the stairs not worrying if my hard drive is spinning anymore. It's amazing. The New York Times reports that 13 of the world's most notable cryptographers and security specialists have released a paper that concludes there is no viable technical solution in their opinion that would allow the US and British governments to gain, quote, exceptional access to encrypted communication without putting that data in danger. The authors include Whitfield Diffie of Diffie Hellman, Ronald L. Rivest, the R in RSA, Harold Abelson, Peter G. Newman, Bruce Schneier, Susan Landau. This paper came out in advance of FBI Director James B. Comey Jr. and Deputy Attorney General Sally Quillian Yates testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the risks of new encryption technology to law enforcement and investigation. These are the people who invented crypt modern cryptography. So I'm inclined to just not say anything except, okay, I think I have to listen to your opinion. If only politicians were as wise as you are, Tom. If only. TechCrunch reports Yola, or Jola, the maker of Sailfish OS will split into two companies. Yola Limited will develop and license the Sailfish OS with Board Chairman Dr. Antisanio in charge. A future unnamed business will build devices for privacy-aware consumers and corporations, which may include multi-OS devices. Former CEO Tommy Pienimacchi has been appointed to a new position, quote, outside the company. Yola will make announcements about Indian partnerships at Mobile World Congress Shanghai next week. So this is really interesting. It's, you know, the face value interpretation is Yola has decided to double down on operating system development and the hardware development seemed to be holding them back and likewise hardware development might have been held back if they felt like they had to use Sailfish OS for everything so everybody wins except no one's going to the hardware company except the former CEO, and I very wisely made you read all the Finnish names here. I feel like this is a little bit of a, maybe it's not, but it looks from the outside like they kicked a guy out who was more interested in hardware than OS and said, great, go do your hardware thing. Good luck with that. Well, you know I was in Finland for a month, so obviously I know all about this, but unfortunately I can't disclose the information I have, so. Oh, really? Yes, of course. Did they make you sign a non-disclosure agreement to leave Finland? Is that what you're trying to say? I can't, you know, confirm or deny that fact. Anything that happened at a bonfire can't talk about it. Anything happened with Yola at Sailfish OS can't talk about it. TechCrunch reports that French start-up open classrooms is launching the first state-recognized bachelor's degree in France that relies exclusively on massive open online courses, aka MOOCs. The program is in conjunction with French school IESA Multimedia, offers three learning paths, engineering, design, and digital marketing. Of course, takes an average of a year to complete and costs 300 euros a month, a significant discount from the 6,950 euros a year that you use to get the same degree in person at IESA Multimedia. You know, you might not think so, but France is actually very technologically savvy and that doesn't surprise me all that much. It's cool. Yeah, I think this is great, but I have some accredited degrees coming out of MOOCs in other parts of the world. This is just the first one in France, and I like the idea of more of these happening, so that's great. TechCrunch reports Indian music service, Sovne, how do you pronounce this? Sovne, I guess. Sovne has raised $100 million and plans to expand into video. CEO Rishi Malorta said, the most exciting thing about the market is that we can be part Spotify, part Pandora, and part Netflix. Sovne will... that sounds somewhat Swedish for some reason. Sovne will try to succeed in taking advantage of the relationship between new albums and Bollywood films. Something rival Hungama has also been trying to attempt. Yeah, I know you didn't go to India on your vacation, so I apologize for that one. It's fascinating, though, because it shows the difference in approaches to different markets. I think what Sovne is trying to do is say, look, Bollywood films come out and their albums sell like crazy. The songs that come out in conjunction with them sell like crazy. We've got to figure out how to combine these two, and they're new to the market, so they can take advantage of that second mover advantage and learn from what Hungama has already attempted. Maybe they'll succeed. The surprising thing, I think, is that actually it didn't happen sooner. From the outside, at least, we have such an image of enormous weight of Bollywood, which is obviously very musical in the type of movies they produce. I'm guessing, though, it might also be an infrastructure issue, because, of course, if we look at things from here, things like streaming music and video is a given, but India is only now getting to the point where they have a viable market for those. The concentration is certainly uneven. Time for some news from you. Several of the stories we've already talked about were submitted by you, and thanks to everybody who submits stories. We always give credit to a couple each day, but I always feel bad for the folks who submit the most important story of the day. Obviously, the microbit was submitted by lots of people, and that really helps. Even if your name doesn't get read, you are certainly appreciated for participating in DailyTechNewShow.Reddit.com. Spare Lollipop and Star Fury Zeta both pointed out that OpenSSL will be released Thursday, July 9th, which all they've said in advance is that it will patch a high severity vulnerability. Graham Cluley on his site points out that the Heartbleed vulnerability has made folks jumpy about OpenSSL patches, which is why few details are being announced ahead of time. They don't want to tip off their hands to a lot of bad actors who are focused on OpenSSL right now. So that's in two days. Just two days, two more days to hold on, and after that, everything will be perfect. Everything will be perfectly safe until the next patch. Strickett Tritch submitted the MarketWatch story that Apple Watch sales have fallen 90% since opening week according to market analysis firm Slice Intelligence. Apple is selling around 10 to 20,000 watches a day compared to 200,000 a day during launch week. An estimated two-thirds of watches sold are the SportsWatch. Slice based its research on electronic receipts emailed to participants. This is definitely one of those stories where your opinion of Apple as a company is going to change the way you write the headline. You could say like two-thirds of watches are sport watches. That's great. Sales holding steady now after a huge spike, or you can say it's a 90% drop. Apple Watch sales are in the toilet. Everyone's buying the cheapest one. It's horrible. It's still too early to tell. We'll see these numbers bottom out, and then they will rise again at the holiday season and possibly be affected by another Apple Watch announcement in the autumn. I'm not saying I know that's going to happen, but there's a good chance that it'll happen. How do you see these, Patrick, when you hear these numbers? Well, again, there are two ways of looking at it. I think my prediction at the prediction show was that Apple Watches would see huge sale numbers in the beginning for the first couple of months, and then they would end up in drawers. I actually heard Veronica last week saying that she wasn't using hers all that much anymore, which surprised me because she was one of the people who was a big fan of her Apple Watch in the beginning. Through my view, my lens, it seems to mean that maybe people are wising up and understanding that this thing is completely useless. However, 10 to 20,000 is not a meager amount, and when you compare it to 200,000 a day for the launch week, obviously the launch week is going to be where all the pent-up demand and the marketing buzz and all of this is, you know, it's the launch. Obviously, they're going to be selling truckloads of those, so I don't think it really means much at this stage. People have to see what happens when they start announcing numbers. Yeah. My sense is that the Apple Watch is not a failure. Even 10 to 20,000 is selling great for a wearable. I think what may have happened, though, is that Apple may not have entirely rejuvenated or relaunched a market like they did with the phone and the tablet. But even then, I think it's still too early to tell for sure. Well, you know, even if you look at 10,000 a month, that's a million, 10,000 a day, that's a million in 100 days, right? And likely they're selling more than those.  It's not a failure by any measure. And that is a look at the headlines. Now, when you talk about wearables, we almost always talk about fitness trackers and watches. And there are a few exceptions to that. One of them had a Kickstarter launch on June 16th. And there was another story about it relaunched on Reuters today. They're about halfway through their funding. It's called Doppel. Now, it looks like a wristwatch. It's round. You wear it on your wrist, but you wear it on the inside of the wrist. So the round part goes underneath your palm or by your palm rather than on the side where you would look at it normally. And it measures your resting heart rate, not on the watch on a smartphone app. And you may say, well, why does it do that? Here's the thing. It wants to get your resting heart rate and then calibrate a rhythm that it taps into your wrist. The idea is that like music, a high energy rhythm that's a little faster than your heartbeat will energize you and increase your focus and increase your energy. And a slower tap that's less than your resting heart rate will calm you down, will slow you down, maybe even help you go to sleep. So the idea here is it's a wearable meant simply to adjust your mood, Patrick. Some might even say to manipulate your mood, although you're the one manipulating it, so it's still fine. I think it's a really interesting story and there are really two parts of that story. First is the intriguing even concept of the thing and it brings the question, does it actually work?  Already, if it does work, it's an interesting use of technology. It works in the way that it knows your heartbeat because it has a little sensor that can measure it and then you can tell it go more intense or less intense as compared to your personal heartbeat at that moment. So if it does work, it's like they describe it like music without the annoying sounds or the sound that can be discomfort or annoyance to your surroundings or even to yourself when you're working. As you said, they tested it themselves, but there was one independent test by a psychologist at Royal Holloway University of London with control tests showing the device did show improved alertness when correctly set to the user's preference. They haven't tested and they're going to, but they haven't quite tested yet whether it provides the calming effect. So there's one independent test that says, well, at least in one of these cases it works. Right, and I think we need, obviously, more than, you know, a couple we need to see. I think everyone will want to have tested themselves before they're absolutely convinced that this weird thing works. But it's already a very, as I was saying, a very interesting use of technology and it could be very useful if it actually has that effect. The other aspect of this though that piqued my interest was the new concept of using technology and wearables to, well, manipulate your, not your physiology, but, well, your mood and the way you feel or behave or... Yeah, I guess physiology is not a bad way of putting it because you're manipulating yourself, right? You're using your heart rate and trying to trick psychologically yourself into calming down or ramping up. And maybe in the future, that could be another, you know, area of research where instead of just having sensors on your wearables, you could actually have them have an effect on yourself. And I know that there are things like, in the case of diabetes, you can have automatic pumps that will release, you know, the... Insulin, yeah. The proper levels of medicine. Exactly. There's lots of examples of that with medicine for sure. But if you start thinking about it in the way that you do in this case where it would help you perform better or calm down when you have to, and maybe it doesn't have to be medicine, but it's a completely new area of research, it could become... I could see it becoming something that is, well, I've professed my lack of love for wearables or at least for smartwatches a few times. And that's mainly because I don't see the need or, you know, the actual practical use. In this case, I think it's very easy to see the practical use. Because it's not about information, right? All of the smartwatches and Fitbits of the world are trying to just do what computers do, which is handle information. And I think what's cool here is that here's a wearable that says, well, we're definitely technology, but we're not worried about the information. We're not using a little bit of information to provide something to you, but we're worried about the result. We're focused on helping you be a more effective person, whether you need to calm down for a presentation or whether you need to, like, stay awake in a meeting. They use both of those analogies in their videos. This is created by a material scientist, a designer, an electronic engineer, and a quantum physicist, right? So this is what I want to see more of, which is not just a startup venture capitalist and a developer come up with an app and more ways to slice and dice information. Like, this is a really interesting new idea, at least for wearables. You know, I'm reminded of an experiment I heard about years and years ago before wearables were a thing. Maybe you've heard of it as well. It was an experiment where someone had created a belt that was equipped with a compass that would, and the belt had a compass and a series of motors that would vibrate to indicate the north. He was trying to replicate what we think birds do when they navigate. Exactly, exactly. And it would vibrate constantly where the north was around his waist. And he mentioned that after, I don't know, a certain period of time of using it, he had developed an instinctive understanding of where the north was. And that was kind of useless at the time, but it was, in a way, the kind of use of a wearable device that would influence his senses. And this, you know, I'm not necessarily super excited for this Doppel device that we're talking about, but the doors that this kind of thinking opens for the future. And actually, you know what? It's 70 pounds. It's, let's say, 100 bucks or 100 euros, a little bit less or more, but that's something I really would be willing to try and see if it even works. So, yeah, it's intriguing. Yeah, it really is. So these folks who are doing this met on a joint course run by Imperial College London along with the Royal College of Art. And so I love when interdisciplinary studies also spit out something like this. And they're doing their Kickstarter now. They're called Team Turquoise. The device is called the Doppel. As you mentioned, if you back them on Kickstarter, you can get it for 70 pounds. They'll probably be more expensive once it goes on sale. They want to ship it April 2016. And the all important battery life question, is the capacity. So you only get five hours if you're constantly trying to amp yourself up. Ten hours if you're chilling. I'm guessing this can be improved if they have some serious research and the mark too. But would you use this kind of, you know, body hacking device? Let's say the good thing here is that it's really just a tactic, you know, feedback. Right, it's not injecting. It's not medicine. It's not having other side effects that we know of. Yeah, why not? See if it works. The really fun thing becomes when you have this sort of this kind of medipack that has all sorts of chemicals that it can inject you with. It's not just a tactic. It's like actually injecting stimulants into you. That's version three or four. That reminds me of the couches on the Rosinante in James I say, Corey is the expanse. They always inject them with medicines to help them deal with the gravity. So yeah, I'd like that around my wrist as well. Let's get to our pick of the day. It comes from Big Jim. He says, I'm sure some of the Android listeners most likely use Pocket Cast. So I know I do because it's probably one of the best podcast players in the Android sphere. I use Pocket Cast on Android myself. Big Jim says, did you know there's an integrated web player for this app? Let's say you want to save the battery on your phone or tablet. Go to play.pocketcast.com. Log in. And there will be all your played and unplayed podcasts. Just like the apps do, you can quickly go to it for listening to the end of that DTNS or Philius Club without touching your phone. When you're done on the computer, just go back to Pocket Cast app on your phone and it will be synced to where you left it for that portable enjoyment. So far, Big Jim says the only downside is they haven't created playlists on the web app. But I sent this as a recommendation to the team and they said it's something they're looking into. So thank you, Big Jim. Play.pocketcast.com. And that's the kind of feature, like whisper sync on Audible that makes you want to live in a mini-ecosystem like that. Agreed. I also want to know when the next Philius Club is. Sorry, yes. I skipped one this month. It's coming back at the end of the month and it will be packed. We have so much to talk about. Send your picks to feedback at dailytechnewshow.com. You can find my picks at dailytechnewshow.com slash picks. A couple of messages of the day. And Dan Gardner just real quickly he's from San Antonio. He suggested Greece as a location for the giant robot battle that Veronica and I were talking about on Monday. He's like, why not help out our Greek friends? They could use it right now. So I don't know, we're just throwing that out there. I don't think that would solve all the Greece's woes but can't hurt, right? Well, you know, hopefully they don't get out of control and start, they do have pilots so they should be able to control them. And then finally before we go Jenny Josephson our producer who is here right now wanted to record her thoughts on the Justin Bieber butt controversy. If you haven't been following this Justin Bieber has posted a picture to Instagram of himself naked from the rear and I'll let Jenny tell you the rest of it. Okay people. Last night Justin Bieber showed his bare bum in a picture on Instagram and predictably the internet went insane. Now I absolutely love the jokes. I mean come on, it's a pretty soft target. But the interesting thing is that as of today, Instagram has not censored a nude picture of Justin Bieber. As we know, Instagram recently updated its nudity policy which reads we know that there are times when people might want to share nude images that are artistic or creative in nature but for a variety of reasons we don't allow nudity on Instagram. This includes photos, videos and some digitally created content that shows sexual intercourse genitals and hello close-ups of fully nude buttocks. It also includes some photos of female nipples but photos of post-bastectomy scarring and women actively breastfeeding or allowed nudity in photos of painting and sculptures is okay too. Now that's a carefully thought out policy but it makes me wonder did a bunch of people at Instagram have a quick hallway meeting this morning and decide that this Bieber image is a mid-shot or even a wide-shot and so it's okay or did they decide that a male butt is less dangerous than a female nipple or did they have no meeting at all because Justin Bieber has 32.2 million followers and you don't go messing with that. Either way, this to me is dangerously close to being another example of a powerful technology company, one owned by Facebook lest we forget, carefully crafting what its users are allowed to see. By declaring some nipples verboten and some okay, Instagram is quietly shaping the world that we get to see or in other words censorship. Now I know, Instagram absolutely has the right to pull or not pull any particular image. They're a company and we all sign the terms of service, but censorship by one company over many people is always a bad idea and it never works because it's always based on values that are not universally shared.  Stolen images of celebrities in the nude and child pornography are two examples that have been in the press lately. But Chelsea Handler's torso of which she is clearly very proud, Rihanna's chest a girl with a period stain on her clothes, a picture of Chrissy Teigen that appeared in a major fashion magazine, how about a woman celebrating her plus size figure or her hard earned stretch marks? Yes, we all have different comfort levels with nudity and we all have different valid opinions about what we're ready to have our kids exposed to, but censorship is the easy way out. So I hope that somewhere in a conference room at Instagram today someone is working on the tougher, more durable solution. The way to tag images as explicit or your kids might not be ready for this or might be upsetting, use caution. Maybe there's a non-invasive way to verify age of Instagram accounts and limit exposure based on that factor. Anyway, there's a lot more I could say on this topic and a lot more that will be said on the story in the next couple days. But I have to go now because I need to photoshop a pair of googly eyes on Justin Bieber's bum. And I'll defend your right to do that, Jetty. Yeah, here's the thing, when you have a large community like that and you have to let an algorithm do some of the standard setting, you're always gonna run into these kinds of issues. Google has learned that. That's why they're safe search and moderate search and settings like that. These are the growing pains that will leave stretch marks on the policy of Instagram. I would have a million things to say about this. But the only one I will say, I think the only really interesting question in this whole story is would they have let that butt stand if it was a female butt? To me, it's the only question that really matters. But I guess we won't get the answer to this. I think a female version of Justin Bieber, some other equally famous artist should post the same kind of picture and we should see what happens. I'm pretty sure Chelsea Handler's gonna be all over this in about two hours. I don't know who that is but go, yes. Just Instagram or Twitter or even better. Jenny, I think that's your point. It's well made which is Instagram can do whatever it wants. But what is the smart thing for them to do? I guess if you really want to take the lead as a company and I'm not saying it's easy because they made a very good point in the chat room which is morals differ so dramatically in different countries that there has to be a better way. There has to be a way to be able to select or self-select or self-police the images and just say okay here's your one moment, brief moment before you can click on it enough time for a parent to say no. I mean it's not. Here's my family-friendly filter. There's a lot of different ways none of which are perfect but just blanket algorithmic censorship is gonna take those edge cases and put them right in the public's eye and cause a lot of problems. The first example is we are now cross-posting this show on the Daily Tech News show YouTube channel and my personal channel Ace Detect and I constantly get notices from YouTube asking me to clarify if I have the rights to pre-post this show that I own in both places because the algorithm can't tell it's the same person. It's just weird. Well thank you Jenny Josephson for that. I appreciate the editorial. And thank you Patrick Beja for being on the show and being back. We missed you. I missed you guys. Seriously I did. It was very strange not being on the show and as I was saying on holiday that I wouldn't even listen to the show. I actively stopped myself from working and I have to say when you work with people you appreciate and doing something you love it's a couple of weeks of vacation is a long time so I have to force myself to do it but now I'm really glad I'm really really glad to be back and to be able to say that I was born ready every Tuesday evening. That's fantastic. It's important to take that time so that you can recharge. You need to do that and it's great when you can do that and be excited to come back so I'm very happy to hear that. You can follow NotPatrick at Twitter and when I say follow NotPatrick that's Patrick. He's NotPatrick on Twitter and then you can get his English language podcast at Frenchspin.com Absolutely. Thanks to our patrons we've got 5,062 folks in there willing and able to make the show possible to have Patrick and Scott Johnson and Veronica Belmont on board Roger Chang helping us, Jenny helping us me helping us the only reason any of us are here is because of you so thank you for your support DailyTechNewShow.com for your support to find out all the ways to support the show. One of them is to get a DTNS t-shirt if you're going to Nerdtacular Jenny and SubGuns created a new DTNS t-shirt it has the DTNS logo on the front and on the back it says Nerdtacular kind of in a line and it has everybody who's involved with the show's name kind of filling in the line so we've got like for instance Patrick Beja's name in there with a letter from Nerdtacular to spell it out you gotta take a look at it go to DailyTechNewShow.com and if you're going to Nerdtacular and you want to order the shirt use the code TwoSides T-W-O-S-I-D-E-S and you won't get charged for shipping you can just pick it up in Salt Lake City at Nerdtacular our email address is feedback at DailyTechNewShow.com you can give us call 51259 daily that's<PHONE_NUMBER> that would be radio.com and visit our website at DailyTechNewShow.com we will be back tomorrow with the aforementioned to Scott Johnson talk to you then this show is part of the Frog Pants Network get more at FrogPants.com Diamond Club hope you have enjoyed this program that t-shirt is really cool yeah Jenny I came up with the design it was like prettied it all up for print for us it works really good and it forms a T for team Tom of course I showed it to Eileen last night the first thing she's like where's your name I'm like it's there it's in the logo my name's everywhere and it's a T that's what everybody has said where's Tom's name I was like oh god I did it you did fine that was a good show what should we call it allow me to go to a show bot once micro bitten twice schooled once micro bitten twice schooled I don't know I get where you're going Dark Redeemer Samsung's on the edge K coding for kids with a K uh go for button I like that one I'm voting for that one cause it's funny Instagram our new robot Oberlar Bieber is an arse Buttergate Patrick's back best bad case scenario I like verb button is very cool though what happens in Finland stays in Finland mood watch let's see Instagram's Justin Bieber policy and but gazi wow I know I had a feeling yeah I mean you throw Justin Bieber and but in any story you're gonna get titles it's like a title machine yeah oh boy it's a self-generating title situation yeah it's the ingredients um be safe chip your kids yeah kind of like that whoa Godzilla it's a Patrickzilla wait is that a lion on your shirt I lowered my desk oh it's the alliance lion from I think what you wear is well for the alliance I don't understand what any of you are saying it's warcraft stuff I know this is one of those things in your head here warcraft warcraft warcraft I'm just gonna have to accept there are things that I'm missing out on major things let me tell you this Veronica would play war talk about warcraft stuff and I would feel that way and then I started playing warcraft and all of a sudden it all made sense to me and I was kind of disappointed because it was just normal stuff like essentially what we're saying is like hey your shirt says one team and I'm on the other team I don't like your shirt like there's no secret I mean you know you're missing out on a lot of stuff you're missing out on noodling you're missing out on hang gliding you know there's a lot of things but you know what not everyone can experience all those things that's true and that's why there's blogs I've just accepted that the AEI guild is there to represent for world of warcraft and that's amazing and I don't have to do it now thank you you're saying AEI is the world of warcraft guild so you don't have to yes I will represent for fine dining in Los Angeles how about that whoa honking on the street there uh oh what happens it's a little honking street maybe at five so we're going with verb button then I guess you don't like that one? no it's fine best bad case scenario is really good the best bad case scenario I think the main topic should always win best bad case scenario yeah are we going best bad case scenario lobbying for how do people actually lobby should I say hey I can well you'd have to come into my lobby and then wait for an appointment wait for me to walk out and then you I think you wave papers in my face is that not cash money well paper money oh because I was going to do it like this virtually through the internet see if we had some kind of HoloLens device maybe yeah sure are you coming out for BlizzCon? probably not for BlizzCon but Nerdtacular I thought yeah Nerdtacular of course I wouldn't miss it for the world I mean well then I'll bring your stabilizer with me to Nerdtacular cool I'm permanently scarred by the fact that the first time I met Patrick Beja in person I was out looking for a toothbrush with horrible morning breath and it was like he was like Jenny and I was like a toothbrush I felt terrible it's fine we don't bathe we don't brush our teeth I would never resort to stereotyping just swimming champagne and they're done so Patrick have you heard about Fabienne Sarriere's new scarf Fabienne is a hacker and machine knitting enthusiast running a kickstarter for a scarf that is uses a provably unique model off of cellular automatons and is made of merino wool I need to have that checked by my scarf department immediately $150 gets you a custom scarf it's called knit yak custom mathematical knit scarves I'm going to put it in the chat room and I will put it in the in the slack as well yeah you can do this over I'm not sure I approve okay see that's why I wanted to you as our resident scarf expert needed to assess this I will look into it and report back I'm very worried right now and concerned I mean grease is one thing but scarves are a serious business I don't know mathematical knit scarves I would think that would be a positive no? I don't succumb to hype Tom I need to perform a thorough investigation of the technology and it's not all about doing computer things here in the old hipster merino wool exactly we have to make sure that some things are preserved and some traditions are observed we can't have anyone just go out and cold themselves a scarf maker and use some kind of automatic process the union regulating the making of scarves I was going to say isn't that why the French aided the United States and the revolution was for our right to make scarves independent of the British king well no so they could gift us the Statue of Liberty like a hundred years later and you don't see the Statue of Liberty wearing a scarf do you? no it's a toga we were just working the favorite trajectory to get a present sure we'll help you the revolution if you give us a statue fine we'll get it to you that would be great if you could actually do that like a I've always wanted to do a show where it's just BS history and you make up these stories of what these things occurred I've always wanted to do that too I started a blog like that once just for kicks we need to do it we can call it soft core history I think I think you should do East meets West specials about that I know a post show where you could do that right right we could just do it right we have a show you know about the Cincinnati Reds right they were started by the communists what true story the what sorry they were started by the communists the Cincinnati Reds baseball team oh right they used to paint all the players exactly the same actually I've been watching the Americans have you watched that show I've watched like a can fall of episodes we've watched most of it I think we're behind quite a bit but we watched the first and second season but I think the third season is almost done right I only have the first two seasons on Netflix and halfway through the first one but yeah I think that could in that context it could absolutely be that the Cincinnati Reds were exactly what they are called the best place to hide is in plain sight and I think that might have been what's been happening there you know the Cincinnati Reds this part isn't actually fake the Cincinnati Reds changed their name red legs so that they wouldn't sound like they were communists well but we all know better I had a hat growing up that said Cincinnati Red legs on it and I was just like they're the Cincinnati Reds this is 1975 right they were definitely the Reds I was like why does it say red legs and my parents wouldn't answer and then finally my grandparents were like commies but they don't why wouldn't your parents answer I don't know I guess they didn't want to explain about talk about my grandpa was very famously like I'll say anything it could have been because they were sympathizers and they didn't want to like maybe my mom I still think McCarthy was a plant I don't actually think he was he was a human he was not a plant he was a plant by the Soviet Union he was their Manchurian candidate I'm auditioning to take Jeff Canada's place doing dad jokes that's what that was about they could do a second Manchurian candidate movie and do the subheading Manchurian candidate 2 take out get it because it's Chinese I can't make that joke I can so it's great minority privilege deal I'm into it alright are you going with you're going with best bad case scenario best bad case scenario yes there's no winner keep wanting to call it bad case proving once again that we pay no attention to any votes you cast that only just helps us narrow down our choices it was the second one I think that yeah yeah no it helps more votes the better but you know if you were trying to like I don't know you're trying to allege democracy in the titles it's not what are we Greece we're going to take this title back to the people I have another movie idea so tying in Greece so remember back in the 80's they did a movie called America Thon and the whole idea was John Ritter was the US president and he started this huge telethon to get the US out of debt and so we could do the same thing for Greece except they do like 24-7 Greece Revival where they just do the whole movie over and over again what if the UK just gives back all the Parthenon freezes and says now or even you just can't give stuff to people they wouldn't appreciate it Tom wait no that doesn't work here's what we do the UK says we're going to keep the Parthenon freezes but we're going to pay you for them the exact amount of debt you have yeah that actually is a good idea they should just start up a snow cone chain with the freezes call it the Parthenon freezes dad joke right there you just won the dad joke crown away from me I'm sorry I'm a dad so that helps alright well that's it for this episode I am out of the post Nine Attack coming up later on most of these locally owned independently owned amco transmission sponsored diamond club dot tv


I have to say, I don't even know what to do with these. Oh yeah, I forgot to fix it. I'm on my duct tape. Oh, hey, yeah, here's the exam, too. It's a long one. No, no, no. I'll read for everybody. We're still good. Fix it? What could I fix it with? I think maybe some epoxy maybe, and a couple of splints. Alright, here's the exams. Before I pass them out and you stop paying attention to me, let me tell you just a little bit about how I grade them just so you can make sure nothing else of the points went right. I don't want to total up things and have it come up short, so I want you to be able to check. When I grade, the way I do it is if I find something wrong, I take off a few points. That way I figure if I miss anything, it's to your benefit. Rather than giving you points when I find something right, because then if I miss something, it's not to your benefit. I do one page at a time all the way through, so I'm more consistent that way. Then I come back to the front, to the first one, and I go through the second page all the way through that. After the first page, I don't know whose paper I'm grading by then, and I'm much more consistent because I keep doing the same problem over and over and over. So down at the bottom corner of the page is how many points you lost that page. Then when I'm all done with the test, I just go and look at the bottom scores on, at the bottom corner of each page, and take that off a 60 points. Just make sure that all those points work out. Not all the points were of the same weight and not even all the answers were of the same weight, because on the multiple choice one, I thought some of these there were wrong answers that were wronger than other wrong answers. So if you were a little closer than being completely wrong, I tried to give you a couple extra points that way. So at data 60, where's Bill? Also make sure that the score I enter on Angel agrees with this. It's pretty easy after entering a couple of the types of score. However, pay attention to Angel's calculation of the percentage total. I have no idea how it does that. Couple I, 50s, very effective. I don't think anybody was under 40, so that's good. Also, I will post a full solution as soon as I figure out what the computer problems are I'm having, and so you can check to see what was the deal there. By full solution, I don't mean just the answer, but an explanation of why that's the answer. Once you've taken a look at that, and still have any questions, then just come see me. Usually though, when you take a second to look at the solution, all the answers are cleared up, and you're no longer mad at me. So much for Samantha's optional day. I don't think she's... Well, the next time, you think you are. Maybe I'll take an option. I'm not really sure either.  Man, that's it. I don't have to justify this.  It's like a cannon. Check the solution. When I get it put up, I'll put it up right after this class. Check that if you still don't get it, then we can bring it up in class, put it on the discussion board, or come see me. Was it in general okay? Nobody went over time, so that was good. That's always a big word. They're longer than I think they should be. Not out of line in terms of too easy, too hard, not fun enough. They're talking to me. No eye contact. It was fun. It was fun. It was fun? You need to get out more. Talk to Andrew about fun.  Back, not only tattoos, but Mary did. If, not in jail. Then he wouldn't come back. Of course, he could be a flight. Alright, then everybody's okay. If you remember, we're looking at what's in general called curvilinear motion. We're going to stick to mostly planar motion or 2D motion. Everything we're looking at happens in a single plane. It may not be a vertical or horizontal plane, but whatever it is, it remains in a single plane. Actually, projectile motion does remain in a vertical plane. At least as we look at it as a free fall problem. Oh, that kind of came across on the test yesterday. What's free fall motion? It's a constant acceleration problem. We are ignoring air resistance. We'll see specifically how that comes into play, but some of the generalities on it were addressed in the book and were addressed on the test. But we're looking at strictly 2D motion as we look at it here. We're going to bring up a new piece of it with some stuff we're going to do today. By way of introduction, let's imagine here we've got a car going at good 60 kilometers per hour. Is that fast? Is that what you guys do? That might as well get out and walk. It's not even worth turning on the car to go 60 kilometers per hour except for reasonable adult human beings. Into a 90 degree corner. Comes out of the corner very simple. Simpleer than something. Don't leave that there. No, I saw the trash can duck. Very simple problem. And all I have is a simple question. And shouldn't have any trouble doing this. Calculate the average acceleration. Kind of a warm up. We haven't been on this kind of stuff for two days now. In fact, when we were doing projectile motion the acceleration was constant in a single direction and wasn't even a big deal. We didn't even have to calculate it. I just gave it to you. As I said, A equals minus G. I was going to say, there's a lot of people don't seem to be moving much. So either you already got it or you're completely stumped. So do this for me. When you've got it, think you've got it. Quietly raise your hand. You don't have to raise it real high because it could be up there while we're waiting for the rest. So when you think you've got it you know, little secret signal something to me, let me know you've got it. You think you've got it. If not, keep going. We'll be with you in a minute. Anybody see Jeopardy with the IBM computer last night? I just read an article about that. Is that cool?   Didn't it have like 45 grand or something like that? And I want to know what the betting scheme is. How he's figuring out what to do on Double Jeopardy. Well no, he's not very consistent. The first time he got what is it called? Is it Double Jeopardy? Yeah, Daily Double thingy. The first time he bet almost half of what he had, which was a good 13 grand or something. Second time he bet like $600. I'm sure I know those guys look into it. They call them gaming experts I'm sure, and strategizers. There was no limit to who they could call in to help with that. And then on the final Jeopardy it was US cities, which you think would have been a pretty easy one, and he bet 900 bucks. And he already had 36,000 or something and then didn't get it. Oh, US cities. He put Toronto. Because for each thing you can calculate this percentage chance that he's going to get it right. Yeah, but US cities, you thought boy, if he doesn't have data based on US cities. Anyway, so they're all Yeah, I've got to take that and gotten to it yet. It's really cool. It's really cool. And Monday, didn't I tell you Monday my elementary school, the person to whom I lost the fifth grade president election was on cash gap. Actually, I think it was vice president. She thinks it was president. So there's a little bit of controversy. Nobody's hands are up. That's why I was talking. Oh, there's a couple hands up. Ah, there's one. You can just wink at me or something. Okay. Well, can't lift it too heavy because it's broken still. Not playing. Boycott. I don't want to embarrass myself. There's no answer. The wrong answer. Oh, no, I didn't say raise your hand when you have the right answer. I said raise your hand when you have an answer or think you have an answer or under the impression you have the answer or relate to personal self-delusion to the point where you think, yeah, now Phil's hand goes up. That finally got to it. Okay, I'm ready. Hand up. No, working. Joyce is up. Enders up. Mike's up. Land fill. Tyler. Thinking. Thinking or thinking. We don't know what. Alva, Samantha, you were up. You gave me a wink. Mark is up. I think you're the only. No, John and Tyler haven't done anything yet. They're either still working. You're done? Your hand up? I'm done. Wow. Did you hear it slam shut? Who's willing to venture the answer? Phil? Phil is. Phil, thanks for volunteering. What is this? Should I have an acceleration? This is a simple problem. Give me the average acceleration. You can't ask questions now.  Who's willing? You winked. You ready? You can't get it or no one can get it. Mark, where were we with you? Zero. Zero. Oh, a vector. There's a little vector sign there. So a vector of magnitude zero but pointing up. Now that's I've got to say I don't know that I've come across that before. I've come across zero vectors with no units, because when it's zero it doesn't matter what the units are, but zero and up. I like that. I draw it if I could. I guess I could put a dot. Just draw the arrow. It's a long time. I don't know what to do with that. Phil, you said can't tell with what's given. Somebody else said that too? Mike said that. Wrong. Sorry, but wrong. You can't tell. We can't figure this out. You said zero, zero, zero. You know it's not zero, zero, zero, and zero. And you, still nothing. Nothing. One. Tyler Drake. Not zero. He didn't know what it was. He knew it wasn't zero. It's not zero. Let's see if we can figure out why or why not. What's the definition of average acceleration? Louder. That was right. Change in v over change in t. Remember, average means we just take the bulk. The bulk change. We don't care what happened in between. We don't know necessarily what happened in between. Two time groups. We've got a time here. Let's go ahead. We'll call that v1. We'll call this one v2. What happened in between? We don't know. But that's not what I asked about. So we don't even care either. So I've got the straight average acceleration, just like we defined it in that fact. In fact, I think we did that first week. Right? Something's missing though. These aren't equal as written. No, no. This is average acceleration because it's the change in the velocity with time. Change in velocity. The rate at which velocity is changing is acceleration. But something's missing. Pardon me? Yeah. They're not equal because this is a vector. Has a little vector symbol. This doesn't. So I've got to put that in there. Now they're equal. Now they're equal.  I didn't. I forgot. Five seconds. Is that what you were looking for? Why don't you just ask for it? Now you're ready to say zero? Yeah. No? When you take this again next year, I won't make that mistake. Okay? So you'll be ready to jump all over me again if I do. What's delta V mean? Yeah, but what do I write next so we can do some work here? V2 minus V1. Changed in the velocity vector. So V2 minus V1 over delta T. What is V2? The velocity vector 2. This is actually the speed because I don't have a little vector symbol over it. But if we put it with the direction, then I have magnitude, units, and direction. I've got a full vector thing. So what do I write down for V2? I want to give it some direction. Start with its magnitude and its units. But I want to give it some direction. So we'll use the unit vectors and just to be exciting we'll pick them in the usual direction. Sort of our X, usual XY direction. So this is 60 kilometers per hour J hat. Positive? Yeah, positive. It's in the positive J direction that I drew. Minus what is the vector V1 that I can write in there? Positive what? No, hold. Yeah, magnitude, units, direction. But positive. Minus sign? He said positive, but I wrote minus. Yeah, that's from the definition of changing. We can't do anything about that. That's just pure beautiful algebra. Alright, delta T let's do this. Change the 60 kilometers per hour to meters per second because I have time in seconds, so I don't want hours and seconds mixed together. So change that kilometer to 60 kilometers per hour to meters per second. Should get the idea that I need to hear the units play plus some just double check and see what other people think. Oh, what they had. You guys said 67 or something, didn't you? 16.7. He says 217. So let's see if we can come to some kind of agreement. You say 17. Anybody know how many kilometers per hour in a meter per second or vice versa right off the top of their heads? Not always off the top of their heads. So what can we manage? Let's see. How many kilometers on the top, so I want kilometers on the bottom, meters on the top. How many meters in a kilometer? Thousands. So if you look at the units, you don't have to worry about whether you divide or whether you multiply. They'll tell you what to do. We gotta multiply thousands on the top. I got hours on the bottom I want hours on the top, seconds on the bottom. How many hours in one second? Who knows that one. How many seconds in one hour? 3600. 60 seconds, 60 minutes, 60 times 60 is 36. Oops. Divide. I mean I don't multiply 3600, I divide. So 60 times 1000 divided by 3600 is 16.2 thirds. We're engineers. We've got real work to do. Give it to me in a decimal. 16.2 thirds sir. 16.7 meters per second. Why don't you say that in the first place? 16.7 known in uneducated points in the world as 16.2 thirds. Oh wait. Divide it by the 5 seconds. Let's go ahead and put that in. So we'll have the acceleration then. In meters per second squared. 16.2 thirds divided by 5 is, bring in a calculator then actually use it. See Joey did it but won't talk to me. 3.34 meters per second squared. And that's the same on both so I'll just factor that out. Leaving behind j minus i, is that right? 60 and a 5 and all that pulled out to the front here. Trust and mark. Anybody check him? He's right. Left behind the j minus i. Just the way it was if we want to turn it around oh my goodness, we can't have a commercial thing on screen, on tape. They're not sponsoring this class. They might have to see it. There, take that. They're not giving me free coffee today. Simple algebra if we wish. No difference. Just sometimes people don't like to lead with the minus sign. Sometimes they do. Sometimes people want to lead with the i and then the j and then the k that they got them. No trouble. Either way was right. All the information was there. Let's draw that. Let's draw that acceleration vector. 3.34 meters per second in the minus i direction. So where do I put it? I can put it about anywhere, I guess. I'll put it here. There's 3.34 meters per second squared in the minus i direction. Is that right? 3.34 meters per second squared minus i direction. That's the first component. Second component 3.34, same length plus j direction. So I'll put that on here. Yeah, that's pretty good. Pretty close to the same length. 3.34 meters per second squared in the plus j direction. Is that right? That's what we got here and everybody was happy up to here. So all I'm doing now is drawing this. There it is analytically. Here it is graphically. So if I add those two vector components together, I get something like that. Tyler's right. Wasn't zero. Phil and Mike were right because at the time they answered, I didn't have all the stuff on the board. I'd forgotten to put five seconds there. But everybody else is evidently thinking, no matter what the time it's zero. But that's definitely a non-zero acceleration. That's not zero. That's definitely non-zero. The speed did not change. How come there's acceleration? If you were going around, say the 60 kilometer per hour was on the speedometer all the way around, that needle didn't budge the whole way around the corner. You ask any dope out on the street and there's no shortage of them. Were you accelerating around that corner? They're going to say, no. The needle didn't budge. I wasn't accelerating. I wasn't decelerating. How come we don't agree with the dopes out on the street? One because we rarely do just on principle. Why isn't this acceleration zero? The needle did not move. Don't throw that at me. You can answer this without skipping ahead in the book a couple of chapters. No? This is a change in the velocity vector. The dope out on the street is thinking in speed. That doesn't work for us. This is change in the velocity vector. If anything about the velocity vector changes, we have acceleration. If the magnitude changes, we have acceleration. Well, it didn't here. If the direction changes, which is as much a part of any vector as the magnitude is, if the direction changes, we also have acceleration. Sometimes both change. Maybe when in at 60 came out at 45. Then both direction and magnitude is changing. And that's most certainly acceleration. In this case, we just happen to have a change in direction only. Any time we have a change in direction, we have a change in vector. We have non-zero acceleration. So to us, those of us who are infinitely smarter than the dopes out on the street, and by the way, they all have access to this video. So when we're done here, I'd appreciate if everybody filed past, got their face on camera when they left the room. Today, just help me a little bit. Any time there's a change in the velocity vector, we have accelerated motion. We need to be more precise. We need to be more complete. Because, well, we're figuring out how the world works. They're out there in philosophy classes where anything works. You could say God is the great spaghetti monster, and that'll fly. Does everybody know about the great spaghetti monster? Oh, yeah, Google the spaghetti monster. And you will find a religion that you can get your hands around. That one's there. That's a great spaghetti monster. Can you Google that on here first? Yeah? Show off. Alright, so let's take this a little bit farther. Make sure we know what we're working with here. Let's be a little bit more. Alright, so we just had average acceleration delta v to change in the velocity vector. And we had that over here in this case. What do we do when we first talked about average acceleration? What do we do next? About three weeks ago I introduced average acceleration and we almost immediately went to what next? Instantaneous acceleration. Just like we did with velocity, too. From average velocity to instantaneous velocity. And then we did that at the same thing with acceleration. How did we define instantaneous acceleration? Yeah, the exact reason I needed you to have taken calculus before you came here. Because we had to do this limit as delta t goes to zero of that average acceleration. Which is the derivative with respect to time. It's exactly the type of problem that Leibniz and Newton were trying to answer. If you'd drother, don't forget we can use this dot notation if you wish. Notice that every single little piece on either side of the equal sign is a vector. Otherwise they wouldn't be equal. I can't have a vector equal to something that isn't a vector. That's not a rule I made up. Just to be anal. Yeah, I know I am anal. I'm an engineering professor. It goes with the territory. But that's just the deal. At least it can't be equal if any part of these aren't vectors if one part is. These can't be equal. So watch that kind of stuff as we go through here. We really got some stuff coming up where a lot of you are going to forget that you're working with vectors at every single little point.  I'm trying to help you. Trying to avoid screwing up. Now, the next step on this, on what is the instantaneous acceleration, the acceleration at any little point we could have taken along here, even if that 60 kilometers per hour didn't hold at every single little spot. All we know is it went in and 60 kph came out at 60 kph. Maybe it did something else in between. We just don't even know. Doesn't even matter. Because we can take an instantaneous acceleration at any possible point that was coming up and we would be able to figure out an instantaneous acceleration if we knew some more about the motion that was going on there, which we will in a second when we get to it in greater detail. This is worked out in the book, what this deal is. It turns out to be V squared over R where V is the instantaneous velocity. If we did go around here, you could look down at your speedometer needle at any instant. You know what the instantaneous velocity was. That's what your speedometer reads. Instantaneous velocity. Look down for an instant. There it is. So that's the instantaneous velocity. Doesn't say V average. V divided by R, which is the radius of the corner, was a nice 90 degrees circular radius turn. Any trouble with this equal sign? Anybody about to howl and protest? That sounds like Alan is. That's not a vector there. There's no nothing here to make it a vector. What should I do? Is there a vector sign over the V? I can't. There's no such thing as the square of a vector. It just doesn't exist. It's not that it's beyond your mathematical capabilities. It isn't. It's not there. It doesn't exist in this world. There's no such thing as the square of a vector. So I don't want a vector sign over the V. So I've got to do something else because it turns out the direction of this is always changing. And some of you have already figured out where we're going with this. In fact it almost came up a second ago. Was it Phil? I think you said it so you know where we're going with this. So what I'll do is say it's towards the center of the circle. That's the best I can do because every place, every different place along here has a different direction towards the center because it's going around this corner. So I can't say I or J because it doesn't always work. But I can't say towards the center because you can find the center of the circle, the center of the corner and so we've got a directional component to it. The derivation of that is worked out in the book. So I'm not going to repeat it here. It's not terribly complicated. It's just not that productive to go through it for the sake of showing it. So let me introduce then our next major topic. We're going to look at circular motion. Things going in circles or portions of circles. Like we just looked at was a one quarter portion of a circle. We're going to look at circular motion. Careful now when you write this down. Stop, Mike. See I left some space in here. We're going to look at circular motion. A lot of what we've been doing last, especially the last couple weeks, we looked at projectile motion and just general motion from curvilinear motion from rectilinear motion. And it was always helpful if at any time we could identify what things were constant, what things weren't changing as we were talking about them. What then, in that mindset, defines a circle. Can I say something's constant, something's not changing or something's changing always in the same way or something like that that I can say that helps us define a circle. Of course I can. What is it? Somebody. What's a circle? No, constant in a circle. The radius. The radius is constant. That's a circle. R equals constant. At the first time I've written down something like this. It's helpful. It helps us. What it does for us is it helps us get rid of some of the problem because the less stuff is changing the more stuff that isn't. And then it's easier, a little bit easier to grasp. So, circle and motion. R equals constant. Yeah, well, of course. That makes perfect sense. Alright, you've got to draw a circle on your paper at least as good as that. That's not too bad. That's a good one. Joey, not too bad. It's easy to do it when you're tiny. Oh. You're enough. You could have used your... Oh, man. Not bad. Samantha, not too bad. Not willing to give a try. Yours is invisible. It's a snow circle. So, there's our circle. An object with constant radius. So, we're going to need to know where the center is, of course, because then that's where our radius is. So, we're going to look at things going around in circles or in portions thereof. We don't have to go through the full circle to talk about what we're talking about here. But, I want to put a little bit more in it here to be a little bit more specific about what we're talking about. Let me add uniform. Uniform circular motion. Point of focus for our two-dimensional motion. What's uniform mean? No, no. I already got radius constant here. That's circular. So, it's got to be something else. Huh? Oh, so it's r equals constant is constant? Oh, no, no, no. Come on. If this was... it would be a boring one, but this is a raised track. Yeah. That doesn't get up and walk away. No. She said velocity is constant. I said no. Alan said speed is constant. Why aren't those the same? Velocity has direction. Velocity has direction. So, this is speed is constant. Is that what I just wrote down? Don't agree again. You got to get married. You disagree so consistently. Yes? No? Did I just write down the speed is constant? Well, not in those words, but in words we understand did I write down the speed is constant? Yes, I did. Because there's no vector sign here. So, I'm not concerned with direction. I'm only concerned with magnitude and units if we had the actual numbers in there. So, the speed is constant. Now what do I write down? Uh, equals two greater than, less than, not equal to. Uh, what else could I write in there? No, I'm not going to write down the chain. I don't know. I got a little tiny space. What am I going to write down in there? Not equal to. There's one vote. Not equal to. There's two. Alan, did you check with Samantha first? So that you two wouldn't disagree. You're on your honeymoon after all. What did you say? What did I put in there? Joey, M-A-W. I said Google that. Don, velocity isn't constant. The speed is, the velocity's not. Take a particular instant. We'll take, we'll take this one we've got right here just because the radius sign happens to be pointed there. So, there's something, whatever it is, going in uniform circular motion. At that instant its velocity would look something like this. At that instant, does that mean it's departing from the circle and the radius is no longer constant? No, because an instant later, by the way that's how big an instant is because you didn't know, an instant later it's now going like that. So it's still on the circle. So r is still a constant. Is the velocity constant? No, no. The velocity is not constant. Is the speed constant? Yeah, that's, I haven't erased that. It's up there in ink. What do I have to draw to make the speed constant? Or can I, can I even draw the speed being constant? Here's a little sketch. There's the velocity vector in perspective. We'll go ahead and call that v1, then v2. Some amount of time went by but we'll let that get real, real small. So we're talking about instantaneous. What do I have to draw so the speed is constant? Or can I even do that? I can do it. In fact, I don't think I did too bad a job showing the speed is constant. No? No, Andrew, what? Yeah, the magnitude of these vectors are pretty darn close to the speed, the same length. Not bad for a sketch cartoon at the board. Remember, the magnitude represents speed. The magnitude and direction represents velocity. So the speed being constant, same magnitude is the velocity constant. Now the direction is changing. Even though the magnitude isn't what the direction is and that's a change in the velocity vector, that's accelerated motion. Anything that happens at velocity vector is acceleration. I don't care if it gets longer. I don't care if it points in different direction. I don't care if it does both. Any change whatsoever in the velocity vector is accelerated motion. In fact, an even tighter definition of circular motion is any motion where the velocity is always perpendicular to the radius which it would be for circular motion, any time the velocity is always perpendicular to the radius, you have circular motion. Because we go anywhere we get some other velocity vector, but same magnitude. And even though it's way over here it's still perpendicular to the radius. So uniform circular motion is this business going on all the time with the magnitude of those velocity vectors never changes. Not anywhere not know how. Magnitude is always the same. We don't consider a change in units necessarily to be a change in that, because that's just a simple conversion. We're going to leave these in the same units. That'd be all kinds of trouble to draw. We're drawing different units from the same drawing. You've got to be a knucklehead and do that. We're not. So we know that we've already worked out instantaneous acceleration for uniform circular motion is v squared over r towards the center. That's a vector this isn't until I give it directions. So I'll say towards the center. Actually there is. And if and when you take a course we call dynamics we'll have a unit vector that always points towards the center. See how that's different than our i, j, k unit vectors? They never change direction. But a unit vector that always points to the center, the unit vector itself is always changing direction. So that's a different calculation to make and we'll do that if you take the course we call dynamics that I'm actually doing this spring right now. So we can draw in the acceleration vector. It's a different vector so I'll draw it in a different color, but it's always towards the center. I'll label it a... See Samantha's got color in there. She's working the magic. Now Joey's going for some colors. What do you got in there Joe? Shooters. He looked over and saw the neat pink highlight and thought I need something to eat. Here's the next question we're talking about uniform circular motion. We've laid out a lot of detail already. We're ready to take another vote.  No? We can trust you to vote honestly. Is this... Well let me ask a preliminary question first. What's the magnitude here of the acceleration vector? No it's not equal to the radius. The radius is a distance the acceleration is an acceleration it doesn't have the same magnitude. I mean they can travel the same length but they're completely different vectors. V squared over r. Magnitude is V squared over r towards center. V squared over r towards center. V squared over r. Got it there. Alright here's what I want you to vote on. Is this a constant acceleration problem? Because if so that sheet of constant acceleration equations comes into play. That tattoo you got is still good. Is this a constant acceleration problem? Think about it for ten seconds.  No peeking. Mark is sitting in front but we'll look at that me. I'm ready to pull the guys out. So that nobody's peeking you can do this right in front here. Say one finger and no you're not allowed to choose whichever one finger you wish. One finger if you think it is constant acceleration two fingers if you think it's not constant acceleration three fingers. If you can't tell four fingers if you don't want to play along. No fingers if you're getting tired of voting I guess. One if it's constant acceleration. One if it's constant acceleration two if it's not. Three if you can't tell. Four if you have stain. Which doesn't make any sense because you just voted which is not a stain. So anybody who votes four gets an explanation to do. Go ahead and vote one or two or three. I'm watching which finger if it's one finger. Is that a vote or is that a piece? I'm cool. What do you do? I got a two. I got a two. Who else did two? Len, what did you do? You did two. I had three twos. No I had four twos. And all the rest ones. Patrick, you said two. What was the two vote? Two was two. You voted two. Two was this is not a constant acceleration problem. Is that right Phil? Is that what two was? This is not a constant acceleration problem. Is that what two was, right Joey? So you're changing to one. You're changing to one. Let him. Maybe he's gone to the dark side. So I only have two people sticking with two. Joey and Phil, since there's only two of you and you think it's not a constant acceleration problem, explain it to us. Why would you vote that? Do you have his cell phone number or why don't you give him a call? Because I want to hear the answer. I just asked you. That's your reason. I figured that was because direction was changing but now acceleration is more involved. So here is a constant. I want to know what to put in between there. You two guys are saying a not equal sign. Everybody else said equals. Even the two that jump ship. You say not equals. And why? Because the direction is changing. He says no it's not. So you're jumping ship. Is this just you, Joey? Joey says... Joey says that. Is that right, Joe? It's always been my philosophy as a teacher to never purposely put anything on the board that's wrong. And I just put that up there, didn't I? So I agree with you, Joe. Sorry, pal. I just want to know who is closed. Joey, what changes if it's not constant? That's because something's changing. What's changing? Direction. It's pointing in that way here. It's pointing in a different way here. It's pointing in a different way here. And in fact over here, over here it's pointing in the opposite direction. That sounds to me like a change in a vector. So this is not a constant acceleration problem. That's right. The center's always in a different direction from where it is at any instant. It's not a technicality. Not a technicality or reality. Let's say you're on this big circular track. You're on Earth. You like northeast, south and west. So there's north and east. And you're at this position here.  Look at the center! You would look at about 45 degrees south of west, wouldn't you?  Look at the center! Are you going to again look 45 degrees south of west? The center's not there. It's in a different direction. It's now over here. What is that? South of east. You get to here. What's your mom say? No, she's not going to say quick look at the center. She's giving up on you. Joey's the only child she loves anymore because he's the only one on the way to look. Once you're looking out the wrong window. Only Joey knows the center's in a different place now. What a lot of you are thinking is that the car we're in but what did I tell you about the direction in which the objects we're talking about are facing? Huh? No? I said it doesn't matter. This is all particle we've been talking about for a couple weeks here. And it never matters in which direction the object is facing. So you can't say but it's always out the same window. Because we don't know what the car is doing. That's not our concern here. We're way out in outer space. Looking down always see for the car is a little point. A little point is going around the circle. Well points don't have windows. So the center is always off at a different direction. This vector, if we describe this acceleration vector in I and J notation, that I J notation would constantly change. I J notation for this vector would be very different than the I J notation for this vector. Because it's a different vector. It's changed. The magnitude's always the same. The direction's always changing. But that describes it perfectly. From where it is. That's what I always drew. You never questioned it. We're talking about this object accelerating. So what's the acceleration vector from that object? With velocity we have speed to represent velocity without direction. Very easy. Take off the vector something. Yeah it doesn't have a new name like velocity and speed does. Velocity and speed are everyday concepts. Everybody's got at least a feeling for velocity and speed. But remember when we first started talking about acceleration, I told you it's a lot less intuitive than the velocity is. So we don't have some other word that describes acceleration magnitude without direction. Maybe it helped if we did but we don't. So that's it. And some books would do that kind of thing. You're okay to do that if you want. I think it's easy enough just to take off the vector something. Our book does bold face for vectors. If you haven't noticed I hope you have. If you haven't you haven't opened your book yet and that explains a lot of things. I can't do bold face at the board so I'll do a little vector sign. So this is a non-constant acceleration motion. But it is constant speed and it is constant radius. Here we go. A little problem. I'm going to go with it. Top Gun Pilot. Top Gun is the Navy fighter jet pilots.  Who we hate. Do you know who my brother in law is? Do you? No? Nobody knows who my brother in law is? An astronaut. Actually an ex-astronaut. He quit about a year ago. Been up on the space channel twice. Been up on the space station for six months. Six happy months of my life I'll tell you. Because do you know what it's like for me to go see my in-laws and go to a dinner party with them and they introduce me. Oh here's our son in law. And everybody goes oh the astronaut. And my father in law says no. He's a professor.  He wants a light for me. But I'm not bitter. Is it really bad? In my mind, yeah. He's fat. They kicked him off the space station and they opened the door. All right. So here's what the Top Gun pilot can do. And his fighter jet going let's say 400. No let's do the let's see. Where's the number? We'll say about 640 meters per second. We'll change that in a little bit. Goes into a circular loop. Not too bad. It's not too bad. We'll leave it. Does one 160 degree loop on a circle we'll say is about 5000 meters. We'll change that in a little bit too. But that for now is good enough. Goes in. Does one full loop. Takes 48 seconds to do that full loop. All the way around. So this is V1. Comes out. 48 seconds later. Having just done one full loop. And I don't care if it was a vertical loop or was a horizontal loop run. None of that matters. It's just a circle. And he went into 640. Came out of 640 showing just like that. 48 seconds later. Calculate for me. Ring tone. Is that what that was? I'll run the tape back. I'll find out what that was. Mike, you're redder than anybody else. Find out for me the average acceleration. When you're done just look up. Raise your hand. Somehow indicate to me you're finished working. Put down your pen. Do something. Let me know you're all done. Find out for me the average acceleration. Nobody done yet? Done. Phil, you'd be done if Len would let you copy. Len, be a sport. It could be your all day. Yeah, I know. Should all be done. You should not only be done. You should have been done quite some time ago.  Am I right, Alan? Did you do it almost instantly? Len? Len just threw it in reverse. Mike, what? What are you thinking? Andrew, what do you think? Anybody got it? The average acceleration, he said zero. What did I say my philosophy as a professor was? I'll never do what? I'll never, huh? Right on the board if it's wrong. Yeah, I'll never right on the board if it's wrong. I'll wait a second. Mike, explain to me how the average acceleration is zero. Is that the definition of average acceleration? Was there a change in the velocity vector? It was 640 meters per second in that direction. It's now 640 meters per second in that direction. Was there a change in the velocity vector? The average acceleration was zero. The average acceleration was zero. I don't know how to make zero vector. There you go. I don't know what that means. Instantaneous acceleration. Who's got the instantaneous acceleration? Which instant? What's that matter? They're at the same place. They're different instances in time, but they're at the same place. So what do you say Mike and or Andrew, now that Andrew's on board? We'll just call it 81.9 meters per second squared. Where? Towards the center. Why not zero, Alan? There's its magnitude. There's its direction. That's not zero. That's its instantaneous velocity. And that's not infinite. That's the only way that could be zero. That's what you're going back with. This will be your ticket of admission on Monday. Same thing. Slightly different. I'll give you a little bit more detail. Let's say now that the velocity is per second. That turns out to be still about the 640 meters per second magnitude. 24 seconds later, that was half of the 48 around the whole turn, until this time. And now with minus 400, minus, oh sorry, minus 400 I, minus 500 J meters per second. I'm not going to tell you the radius this time. I want you to find for me the instantaneous, the magnitude of the instantaneous acceleration anytime. We'll assume it goes with that constant speed, uniform circular motion. So I want the magnitude of the acceleration. We already know it's always towards the center. So we don't need to do anything with direction. Then we just have to sketch that whenever we need it. You don't have that?  That'll be your ticket of admission. And I'll be punching tickets.  If there's any questions after that, let me know. Wow, it's a rough day.