Alright well welcome everyone to our monthly webinar and tonight I'm delighted that we have Amy Goldman to talk about the Communication Bill of Rights reboot and I don't know Amy really well but I'm getting to know her better and I know that you're in for an interesting evening and then we're going to hope, I'm going to chat a little bit about some of the ways that we're using it around the province and I know some of you've been part of that process and then I'm also hoping that maybe some of you will share the ways that you might have used the Communication Bill of Rights in your work coming forward. So with that I'm going to turn it over to Amy and welcome to Virtual Alberta. Well I'm sorry I can't share our Philadelphia springtime with you but thank you for the welcome. Let me just start by telling you a little bit about myself. First and foremost and this is the hat that I'm wearing today is that I'm a member of the National Joint Committee on the Communication Needs of Persons with Severe Disabilities going forward I will just use the acronym NJC. For 24 years I ran assistive technology programs for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania out of the University Center of Excellence in Developmental Disabilities at Temple University. I currently am the technical assistance specialist for the basically the Eastern U.S. for the National Brief History about the NJC. This was a result of a meeting of the Council of Language, Speech and Hearing Consultants in U.S. State Education Agencies that met together to try to develop national guidelines to meet the needs of children and youth with severe disabilities. As an outgrowth of that the Office of Special Education Programs in the U.S. Department of Education held a consensus conference that then came out with 33 recommendations regarding the education of children with severe disabilities. Many of those had to do with communication and TASH, I don't know how many of you know about TASH. TASH used to stand for the Association for Individuals with Severe Handicaps quote unquote and now it's just called TASH and ASHA organized the NJC. So the first guidance documents were issued in 1992. So 1986, 2016, we celebrated our 30th birthday. It's an interesting organization in that it has members from prominent organizations that care deeply about persons with severe disabilities. What do we mean by persons with severe disabilities? It's typically disabilities that are accompanied with intellectual and developmental disabilities. So ASHA hosts the website at www.ASHA.org slash NJC but ASHA does not own the NJC. So our member organizations are including TASH. The American Association for Individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, we have TASH twice, sorry about that, CEC, the Council for Exceptional Children, their Communication Division, RESNA, the Rehabilitation Engineering Society, Rehabilitation Engineering and Assistive Technology Society of North America, ATAP which is the Association of Assistive Technology Act Programs, USAC which is the U.S. Society for AAC, the U.S. Chapter of ISAC, the International Society for AAC and I hope that many of you are members of the Canadian Chapter of ISAC, AOTA which is the American OT Association and APTA, the American Physical Therapy Association. So it is an interdisciplinary membership by design. The purpose of the NJC is one that includes advocacy and again we're talking about individuals who have significant communication support needs. Sometimes we call these individuals with complex communication needs that are accompanied by intellectual disabilities and of course there may be a whole host of other disabilities as well. But I think one of the defining characteristics is a focus on people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, often a population that is devalued and just not addressed. Again the focus of the NJC is research, policy, practice and training. It's a huge need. I don't have the statistics for Canada but the stats in the U.S. are that there are approximately 2 million Americans who are unable to speak or who have severe communication challenges. We know that there is a huge shortage of trained personnel. We know that there is a need for guidance for interdisciplinary teams and other stakeholders and that intervention and support for this population needed to include foundational beliefs that are evidence-based that would guide practice. So again a lot of concerns that individuals with severe disabilities that include intellectual and developmental disabilities and include autism are often left behind in intervention. And we know that particularly in the adult world once they leave the service system of public education these folks are particularly needy. So there is a whole host of evidence that individuals with intellectual disabilities are at the greatest risk for victimization. If you haven't read the book Ghost Boy I encourage you to read it and understand the victimization that he went through particularly when it was presumed not only did he not have a voice but that he did not have cognitive level that would enable him to communicate the abuse that he endured. These folks that we're talking about here may or may not be intentional communicators as a result they may be using a lot of non-standard communication which requires more from the communication partners. And they may not be considered good candidates for intervention to improve communication. And in fact unfortunately to this day a lot of speech pathologists more than I care to admit look at prerequisite cognitive requirements before considering individuals with severe disabilities as candidates for an intervention to improve communication. Now as I mentioned before the NJC is interdisciplinary because it is important that no one disciplines own communication goals objectives and interventions. So I was delighted just a couple of weeks ago along with the representative Judy Schoonover from the American Occupational Therapy Association to present at their national conference in Philadelphia. And I believe that PowerPoint has been posted on the NJC website. It's an excellent PowerPoint because it includes a message through many slides and reference to the AOTA's principles about why OTs need to be engaged in supporting communication. So the NJC represents all these other disciplines but finds the common ground of where these different disciplines should be uniting on behalf of people with severe communication challenges. So it is quite unique both in the interdisciplinary nature of the organization the lifespan view and again the focus on individuals with severe disabilities including and especially those with IDD. So some recent work well at least the past 15 years or so of the NJC as I mentioned the first Bill of Rights was one of the first accomplishments of the NJC before the turn of the century. So in 2002 they came out with a very strong eligibility statement addressing the fact that eligibility for services should be based on need and that and not on other kinds of arbitrary criteria or prerequisites. So I know for me when I was doing more direct service that it was very important even I knew this I often referred to the NJC as quote a higher authority. So don't just believe me Amy Goldman SLP but here's more credible maybe more credible and evidence-based work from a national committee to support my position regarding eligibility. They've done some mega analysis so for example a review of intervention studies that found that positive change can be made in the communication behaviors of individuals with severe disabilities actually regardless of their age. So again sort of debunking this prerequisite eligibility based on age etc. In 2011 there was a conference that addressed the challenges that confront researchers and there are some great materials still online and the URL is up there in the PowerPoint and Kathy you can feel free to disseminate this PowerPoint to the attendees and in 2016 we published the revised communication bill of rights and here it is. I believe that Kathy did distribute this to you already. This is available for downloading at the NJC website. Again that's asha.org slash njc. This is the pretty version. The original version appears in an article by Brady at all that was published in 2016 in the American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and that citation is on the bottom of the suitable for framing NJC. So now I'm going to do a little deeper dive into some of the changes in the 2016 NJC Bill of Rights. So and we'll call that for short the CBR. So one of the things that there was was a reordering or in my view a reprioritization of some of the particular elements of the Bill of Rights. So number one and this is I think why we all use or how we all use communication first and foremost and that is it is the way that we interact socially the way that we maintain social closeness and the way that we build relationships. So part of what this reflects is the ICF Biosocial model. Again it highlights how important communication is and it also recognizes that one of the key reasons why communication skill building is important is to promote inclusion in the community and across the lifespan. So I believe requesting was number one and it is now number two. So you all probably know that this is the most frequent intervention target. However we would all acknowledge that if the only thing our friends did with us was to request we would not necessarily want to continue interactions with those folks. So really again the communication Bill of Rights as being a tool to make sure that first and foremost is the importance of social interaction and relationships. Maybe requesting should have been pushed even further down on the list but certainly it is important to be able to communicate if you value or are striving to support an individual in self-determination. And person-centered planning is a very important tool to help to identify what those desired objects, actions, events, and people are as well. So refusing and rejecting, rejecting has been added to the revised Bill of Rights and it adds choices. So here's an interesting aspect of intervention. I remember a young man many years ago that I worked on providing him access to AAC and I did some follow-up oh about six months after I was just a consultant so I came in got them on their way and then withdrew and let the local folks take over. But I spoke with his mom and I said you know how's everything doing with Doug and she sort of gave me a okay and I sent the reservation in her voice and I said well tell me why I'm hearing that concern in your voice and she said well Doug used to be so easy and now he's like telling me no all the time and I'm like yay Doug go Doug you know but but certainly the ability to refuse or reject is powerful and it is something that people with complex communication needs may not have had accessible to them or they may have been expressing it in ways that were less than satisfying. So again the Bill of Rights recognized that it is important to understand behavior behavior as having communicative meaning in communicating refusal or rejection. The right to express personal preferences and feelings and again we're highlighting the fact that your assessment and your person-centered planning process should include a way to inventory what these personal preferences are and again we're focusing on function not just form and it may mean that we have to improve the partner responsiveness to feelings, the right to make choices from meaningful alternatives. And so the language in this particular right has been changed a little bit from the right to be offered choices to really focus on the person who is making the choice. So the person has the right to make a choice and here we have to as interventionist make sure that there are authentic opportunities for choice making. This one is new and it's like one of the things that really brought home to us the need for the update and that is recognizing that communication is way more than requesting, way more than rejecting also it's the right to make comments and share opinions. This is difficult to establish particularly for people who've never even had the opportunity for the first two things but it clearly extends the purposes and functions of communication. It is one of the ways that we express ourselves and so is a totally appropriate intervention target. Again drawing on my experience as a clinician I remember being in a classroom with 10 kids, three teachers, one teacher and two teacher assistants. The students had severe disabilities and they were finger painting. You can imagine the scene. So one young man was finger painting and then proceeded to paint himself. He was using orange, paint himself and anything that was not nailed down. But what I saw was the teacher take him and bring him physically over to the sink and she was just making sounds like oh don't touch me you know that kind of thing. Never once, never once did she say you're orange or provide you know and we know so much about modeling. So if she wasn't commenting how could we expect the people that we work with to comment? So it would have been an ideal opportunity to teach him how to make a comment at the very least you know dirty even if orange color wasn't an appropriate target wet dirty etc. The right to ask for and give information and that includes information about changing changes in the routine and environment. If any of you have ever been unfortunately hospitalized you know that one of the things as a patient is wanting to know what's going to happen and what the people that we work with to be able to ask for and an appropriate hopefully appropriate form information as well as for them to give information about their state very important. And again this is all about extending beyond requesting and provides an active role for the individual. The right to be informed about people and events in one's life. This is new in our revised bill of rights and again it supports the role of the communication partners in providing appropriate information even though we make such assumptions about the capacity of people with severe intellectual and developmental disabilities to understand. So again here some support for the role of the communication partners and what we need to be doing. So another right is the right to access interventions and supports so that language supports is new and there's an implication that those supports are evidence based. Our communication acts acknowledged and responded to and again this is I think what all of us hope that when we communicate what we are communicating is acknowledged even when the desired outcome cannot be realized. So even when somebody is gesturing madly to the door but it is not time for them to leave or they cannot leave or the weather indicates they can't go outside for that communication to be acknowledged and responded to and not ignored. Another right is to have access to functioning AAC and other AAC devices and services at all times not just at communication time or circle time. Now the next data in the U.S. there are about 35 states whose vision or department of developmental disabilities use a common quality assurance data tool called the national core indicators. Very very interesting and you know if you google national core indicators you'll see all that data annually can break it out by state you can see the kinds of questions that are asked that have a big focus on self-determination and inclusion and also some civil rights like the right to have private telephone conversations. In Pennsylvania which where I've done most of my work we have a program called independent monitoring for quality I am for Q for short where we've added some questions and the I am for Q survey in Pennsylvania is conducted with over 6,000 recipients of developmental disability services a year so it's a pretty robust sample and what we have found over the years with really really persistent like maybe it changes 1% 70% of those who report not communicating via speech do not have access to a formal communication system. Wow so this is very dismal and you know reflects several challenges in the service system especially services for adults with IDD. Amy you're making my illusion that things are much better in the states go away sadly. Well I'm sorry to depress you it's probably better for school age children right but when the when you're talking the adult service system the communication supports the funding for communication supports is not as there. Okay one of our other rights is the right to access environmental contacts interactions and opportunities and the additional language that is added in the revised bill of rights is these contacts interactions and opportunities to promote participation including opportunities with non-disabled peers. The next right to be treated spoken to with dignity and addressed with respect and courtesy hopefully this is not new to any practitioner and it's not new to the communication bill of rights so to be spoken to directly and not in the third present when in the third person when the individual is present and culturally competent interactions so to have clear meaningful and culturally and linguistically appropriate communication with communication partners. And this is very interesting and it can be challenging at least in much of the adult DD service system in the U.S. because of wage issues many of the direct support people are themselves from minority cultures. And that's a challenge not to manage for the individuals with DD themselves who are from diverse cultural and linguistic communities but certainly that's a clear right. So the implementation of the communication bill of rights is the next challenge it's one thing to put it on paper but we know to make it a reality it's very important to include adaptive functioning within the ID definition to utilize the ICF framework to increase the knowledge of different cultures and adapt assessment and intervention to conduct to use dynamic assessment procedures to continue to research and identify effective strategies to change the behavior of the non-disabled communication partners. I'll tell you in my knowledge in my experience it is way easier to change the focus and change the behavior of a person with disabilities than to change that of the communication partners. It is important to continue to focus on meaningful contexts and routines and functional outcomes to move beyond requesting to increase research in the area of comprehension and I think this is clearly an area where more work needs to be done and I venture to say that we underestimate both the existing degree of comprehension among people with severe communication disabilities and we don't know enough about the role of augmentation to improve comprehension. Of course we also need to continue to enhance the role of literacy and identify effective practices. We need to maximize all tools both generic and specialized technologies. We need to look at interprofessional practice through interprofessional education on the pre-service level. Of course to me that's a big challenge since people in their pre-professional training as SLPs don't get enough focus on this. We have to hold dear and value self-determination and the right of all people to affect their existence through communication. So this is another declaration of rights for you to take a look at. This is the Coleman Institute on individuals with cognitive disabilities and they have a declaration as well and they encourage both organizational and individual sign-ons that you can sign on on their website but it's just another resource that this while of course communication is involved it also looks at communication vis-a-vis technology and information access. What I don't have because I've used most of this presentation in the US and the US isn't a signatory is to encourage you to look at the UN Convention on the rights of persons with on the rights of persons with disabilities and you will find if you were to endeavor to do a crosswalk I think that you would find many of the communication bill of rights items are in the UN Convention. And I'm going to say just for notes I lost your coffee I lost your sound. Oh sorry I was going to say just for people's awareness Canada is a signatory to the UN Convention. So I think that's something we might need to spend some time on. Yeah leverage leverage that.  So as I mentioned before we have a website that is hosted by ASHA and it has lots of resources that you will want to explore. So other NJC initiatives is the NJC meets face-to-face twice a year and last year we looked around and we were like we all have gray hair. So we have founded the NJC network to encourage the next generation of advocates and researchers or early career folks to promote the communication bill of rights to help direct where the NJC does its work. And some of that comes from the NJC knowing what the field challenges are and for network members to contribute to the body of knowledge. So coming soon are going to be some e-modules so those of you who are familiar with the work of Karen Erickson may know that with a grant that she had she has done some excellent modules that are child based student based to train educators on being aware and sensitive to an understanding of the communication of students with severe disabilities. So the NJC is adapting those modules to address similar issues regarding adults. So we'll be looking at focusing on people of all ages with significant disabilities and their communication partners. One of our recent initiatives where we are continuing to do more work is with addressing myths and misconceptions about communication and adults in particular with severe disabilities. So stay tuned for that. Again there's recent research that supports the efficacy of interventions and communication supports even with adults with severe disabilities. So I mentioned we do presentations at all kinds of national conferences, advocacy, and follow us on Facebook. And here's the article. You might find the article useful and it's where the National Joint Committee lives. So that is the end of my slideshow and I'm sorry I took up so much time. No, that's great. That was perfect. That was just perfect, Amy. Thank you. I'm going to maybe ask Ross to give me presenter status and also I'm just going to take that little minute and pause to see if anyone has any questions on what Amy's talked about or what yeah, what we've heard so far. You've got presenter status. Yeah, I see that. Thank you. I'm just remember how to yeah, I'm trying to do a pause. I'm trying to do a lengthy pause where I don't fill the pause with my own stuff. So anybody have any thoughts, questions, comments? A couple things that came up for me and while I get people you can put in the chat. Maybe Ross, you can watch the chat is the importance. I mean Amy, our group primarily is focusing on students but you know it's important I think for us to think really that our students will become adults and we need to be cognizant of the challenges that are still all too real for adults with complex communication, especially adults who have intellectual challenges as well. So that's a real takeaway for me. Yeah, let me just say a few words. So this is definitely a real challenge at least in the US. We call it transition and that unfortunately transition planning all too frequently does not include how we're going to transition the use of a device if there's a device in play, how we're going to make sure that the adults, their communication partners in the next settings are prepared to use and maintain the device including upgrading vocabulary. So if your folks are working with secondary students so please keep that future environment really first and foremost in their mind. Actually if you want Kathy, I have a little checklist I made up on things to think about for example does your student or parent because the parent is likely to be a constant have operational competence. Okay, do they know how they got the device? If the device breaks do they know what to do with it? So remind me and I will send that to you and you are welcome to distribute it. Amy, can I just a couple of questions have popped up. One says does your state offer universal access to speech generating and communication devices for children or is it a candidacy model? So it is for school age kids it is up to the individualized education program team but certainly there and and if the team determines that the student should have an AAC device and that need is put in the individualized education program it is the responsibility of the school district to provide that device. So here's the rub if the school district sends their money on the device they can choose to keep it when the individual graduates but one of the reasons why if you followed the healthcare debate in the U.S. at all many kids with severe disabilities receive Medicaid and Medicaid may be a funder of devices and if it was Medicaid that funded the child's device then in fact it would graduate with the child. So I hope that helped. Now the reality is that not all school teams jump on board we have a lot of students who are let me say this politely stuck with low-track systems because there is a view that because they are low functioning that's all they can benefit from. Yeah yeah and and I mean the question I didn't give you very much context about Alberta but we do have to our health system provisions for AAC from cradle to grave but it is a matter of you know doing matching and many the same things there but we at least do not have this fall off point you know that the device it follows the the person and the healthcare system you know not that it's perfect by any stretch we've got lots of things to work through but it certainly is it's not it some schools do fund devices especially iPads now but we do have a provision to to do something provincially so which yeah which is which is great and it hasn't been around for that long. The other thing that I'm going to just pick up a couple things that you said and then I'm going to talk really briefly about some of the ways that we've used it. I talked about a device not only when they're doing communication time but circle time and I might add I'm looking at Karen and Karen Erickson's literacy bill of rights I'm almost thinking they need an education bill of rights that communication that they need a right to education beyond circle time. That circle time just particularly challenged by that these days so anyway it was lovely to have you go through them and to share the changes I think that's really important and to help us focus a little bit I'm just going to run through briefly now how at least those of us who are part of the COP have used them. Last fall we had some face-to-face meetings with people in two locations and shared actually the article Amy so there's a few people and I do love that article there's a few people who have had that and we had some dialogue around that. I also unpacked a little bit but I thought were some of the key messages that people would could be could be drawn from that article so this whole overview of communications for individuals with severe disabilities some good guidance in terms of thinking about assessment and you did touch on that today a little bit and then some also some important guidance in terms of intervention and for me the other really important piece that you highlighted is that this is a team this is teamwork and we really truly need to bring the team together and it's from bringing that you know you focus particularly on OTs on absolutely for me my my real important passion is to make sure that we have teachers who really fully understand and because at the end of the day they're there all the time right parents and teachers parents primarily but you know in terms of classroom environment so I was really happy that you talked about team and that we and we talked about that a little bit we did a little bit of a compare and contrast although was you did a way better job of coming to contrast of course and then what we what we did do as a discussion point was talk about three things that people also say what are you currently doing to to make those bring these rights to life in in with the kids in the classrooms that you're working at how might you further operationalize these some general thoughts and challenges and I have all of these lovely responses which I haven't collated yet and it's been months but it was a really good dialogue I think and maybe some people who were there might want to share your thoughts again there's room for other people's voices here than mine and about how that work went and felt for you but it was certainly very rich dialogue and I looking you know paying attention to what's really happening in your environment right now was really I use looking for people that I'm also going to share when I do workshops now and there's a lot I tend to do and I know people around on the online are doing workshops all the time as well I ask people to just take a little look at which of the rights really jumps off the page at you and an interesting thing for me it and I'm happy that it does jump off the page is number 14 the right to be addressed directly and not spoken for or talked about in the third person up all the time and I'm and I'm really you know it's it's two it's a double-edged you know oh really do we really have to talk about that so much and then the other hand because the the lived experience that I have in classrooms is often these kids are spoken about like they are they are not you know that they're they're not there they're not they're not and you know it really gives for a great dialogue around the fact that we we need to expect that children are understanding everything you say and we cannot that's just incredibly bad practice but it seems to be and you know what and I I say I have been guilty it's not it's not I have been guilty of doing that too but now you know I really not only trying well I make a point of catching myself of them going there and also just to try and help people redirect that the child is present and you know the other place that it's come up in my experience is when kids are in hospitals and don't have any communication systems and the way that doctors and nurses talk in front of them and one young woman who I know who has rats talks about the fact that they're talking about some significant things in her prognosis and she's right there and you know it's it's a it's a yeah that one just really it's a really profoundly important right and and it both I guess it both shocks and heartens me that people say wow we need to attend to that we need to do better around that so um yeah so those are and in always having a dialogue around so what jumps out at you and and having a launching off point has really been um provided in my experience a wonderful rich conversation so I'm hoping to actually maybe write up that those things that people talk about and share them out and I think it'd be really it was great um it's just that big thing called time that gets in the way um but as I said always they're um they're great now the other person somebody else said to me I asked them what the difference between the two were and said that one said oh these ones are way better because they have pictures so so is there any uh anybody doing the work on uh symbolating the the communication the new one do you know is that is that the is the first one that one of the pictures is the 1992 one and right right so first we're trying because because the communication bill of rights were published in an article yeah we have permissions that we need to get the first thing that we're trying to get is permission to translate them into Spanish and French bravo I've already been asked about that actually so that's fantastic because we need them also I'll say fabulous okay but I I think it it might have been scope that is the picture yeah yeah so maybe we should ask them there you go very nice I feel I can take that on and I do that for sure um I'm going to sort of close with a couple of um housekeeping things but I'm just again going to pause anything on the chat anyone else oh some people are saying yay for translations um anyone else have any thoughts or questions for Amy before we uh say thank you and let her go the chat window has been quiet okay all right that being said I'm going to do one little advertisement Amy talked about Isaac and you Zach and um I'm going to encourage people they are doing um last Thursday this happened and there will be another one in May sorry I didn't have the right thing in May but um you Zach is doing this lovely thing called AAC chat on what would that be the second Thursday of every month and um I've been involved I've been as much as I'm a Twitter person which I'm really not I've been trying to participate a little bit and um things that happen on you Zach are also open to Isaac Canada members so um I would encourage you this is one more reason to join Isaac Canada and also to think about joining the the chat I will try and remember to send out the date in our communications and um I know that Amy has done lots of important work with you Zach so we're going to be supporting them as much as we can yeah we have a we have a bunch of archived webinars oh okay okay very good all right remind me and I'll send you the direct link love it we'll definitely do that absolutely thank you so very good and then also just and I don't have the pretty picture I'm sorry um I am actually at a conference in the States for those of you don't know so I'm kind of um Kelly Fauner next Kelly is going to be doing part three in the environmental communication training webinar so um for those of you who haven't caught up with parts one and there on the ERLC website and for those of you who maybe want to refresh her before Kelly does this in May you can do that and otherwise she's going to be closing the loop on this work with us which is absolutely fantastic and um Amy thank you so very much for spending this hour with us it was most enjoyable and most informative and um I know you're a busy lady so um yeah but we will take your work forward and try and spread it around and make sure that those communication bill of rights get um operationalized and thought about in cross operator and I know there's lots of wonderful people online tonight who will take that work further forward as well so thank you so much thank you all right any seeing no more oh hang on been all right oh there's something about working on the sound of that excuse me Kathy because many of the videos that were on the ERLC website all right all right well thank you okay good night all thanks everybody thanks


So, welcome to this lecture on advanced digital system design in the course digital system design with PLDs and FPGAs. The last lecture we have started with the effect of metastability in sequential circuit and data path. We did not spend much time on how the metastability happens in a flip flop or latch or anything like that though briefly I mentioned the cause of it in a just essentially our focus was to look at the effect of metastability in sequential circuit and data path and how to handle that situation. So that the proper operation of the circuit is not imbibed definitely analysing the metastability in detail starting with the cross coupled latch moving to kind of edge to get flip flop and now we will bring clarity. But due to lack of time we will set that aside and focus on the what is useful for the design of the digital system we will handle it that is a plan. So let us run through the slides we have looked at the last lecture. So we know that in an edge to get flip flop for the data to appear at the output from the input the input data has to satisfy some timing requirement with respect to the clock edge active clock edge. The data has to arrive sometime before that is called setup time not only that it has to remain at the input after the clock edge for a while that time is called the duration is called whole time if that happens then from the clock edge with a delay the output appears ok. And this I said if you analyse a master slave flip flop which from which this edge to get flip flop is constructed during the negative for a positive edge to get flip flop during the negative clock period the master is in transparent mode. So the setup time would normally mean from the active clock edge that is from when the master is going to be cut off from the input that actually the maximum minimum time required for that latch to set because that is when the latest the input can change if afterwards the input changes there is not enough time to set the master latch. So that is what is the setup time of course normally in the clock path there will be inverters to choose the correct polarity and to choose the opposite edge for the slave and all that. So normally there will be 2 inverters so that inverters queue has to be removed from the setup and the whole time is that inverter delay itself because even after the clock going high it take that inverter delay for the master to cut off that is a hold. So during that time the data should not change and when the positive clock edge comes the slave get the copy of the master slave is enabled the master is disabled. So for the time for slave to set as a propagation delay normally again there will be an inverter that delay has to be added with the latch delay slave latch delay for the propagation delay. So that is a essence of this setup hold and propagation delay but again in a basic course many a times you are told that if this is met the input is captured at the output kind of truthfully but many a times it is not discussed what happens if it is violated ok. So many things can happen as we said if the setup and hold time is violated kind of the flip flop can miss trigger that means suppose the previous value was 0 and was trying to set to 1 it may remain in 0 or it may kind of set to 1 ok. Now so it means that you are not really sure what the output is going to be it could be 0 or 1 but as I said normally it is not a dangerous situation as long as input persists for at least 2 clock periods then definitely in the next clock edge everything will be ok because it will meet the setup and hold time and then the data is captured at the output properly ok. So miss triggering itself is not a very serious issue but the second effect is that it might take longer time to resolve it that means if the data changes close to the active clock edge it will take long time for it to settle and that is dangerous because like we have in a sequential circuit we find the minimum clock period. And once you decide that if the data the output takes longer to settle then it can violate the setup and hold time at the destination register no issue with this flip flop but it is driving something at that destination register it can upset the setup hold time. And the worst effect would be that this output can get stuck to a voltage level which is not neither 1 nor 0 it will be in between and that can drive the any circuit not even flip flop it can even drive the combinational circuit into active region the gate and that will act as amplifier any slight noise it will start switching it will dissipate lot of power may be it is taken care in the design depending on how you design. But definitely this is quite disastrous that it gets stuck in between and the worst thing is that we cannot definitely say when it will come out of it we can only say about the probability so that means it can remain there for a long time when we talk about probability that does not kind of preclude chances of it getting stuck for a say 5 second or 5 minutes or anything like that though we talk about the probability you should remember that but that happening often when the probability is low may not happen but then like the probability is probability so you should not have kind of a deterministic view on the probabilistic events that should be kept in mind. So let us come to that the effect of it but in a sequential circuit or in a data path we take care of all these we like we choose the proper clock period to meet the setup time we analyse the effect of this Q we analyse the effect of whole time and this Q effect on both we will consider though we have not discussed that in the in our lectures but we will be doing that when I take the FPGA part of the course. So in a data path we do the maximum frequency analysis whole time violation similarly in a FSM we do both and then when the metastasphalic can happen in this circuit is a question we said yes there could be inputs directly coming to this combinational circuit in a data path there could be inputs coming to the first stage of the data path may be this continues you know there is registers combinational circuit registers combinational circuit and so on. But at some point somewhere some data from the external world or the data path comes in and in an FSM there are inputs mainly this is from the data path. But we are not sure the frequency of the clock from where this input is coming ok may not be same so or it could be a some process which is generating a logic value like a limit switch which is now relation with the clock many a times and then these inputs may not meet the setup and whole time as far as this input is concerned may not meet the setup and whole time and as far as this is concerned it may not meet the setup and whole time. This latency as I said is a matter of shifting it does not affect the probability of any particular input you know getting creating metastability in this flip flop. So the problem as far as a sequential circuit or a data path is concerned the asynchronous input is the one which can cause metastability. So once again though we have learned metastability our concentration as far as sequential circuit and data path is concerned should be on inputs which are not synchronous ok. So if you are a good designer that there you should focus your attention the inputs coming from an asynchronous domain ok that should be handled properly that is where the crux of the problem ok that is like asynchronous input. So when we say asynchronous input will be an input which is generated as a on a flip flop or a register with a different clock or a process which is not synchronized to the sequential circuit. So very easy to answer this question that the problem is that the input is asynchronous. So the solution is to synchronize it and it is again we do not know probably at the beginning you do not know how to synchronize but it is very easy. Suppose there was an asynchronous input which was going to this combinational circuit and reaching a destination register. The way to synchronize is that you connect that input asynchronous input to a D flip flop clock by the same clock as a sequential circuit and the queue is connected here. Now what happens is that the D is captured by this and appears with a delay. Now any time D changes this is captured at the queue with a delay of propagation delay TCO and that you know transmit through the propagate through the combinational circuit reach here. So if the clock period is chosen properly in the next positive edge here this input that means the output of this synchronizing flip flop will meet the setup time and whole time there should not be a problem. And of course the input which is synchronized will reach at this destination register with a latency or a delay of one clock period. So that is a penalty we pay, penalty in terms of time that there is a latency and penalty in terms of the area which is a flip flop ok. So nothing comes free. So you suffer in delay and suffer in the area ok that you should know. Now as I said we have not solved the problem in a very kind of foolproof way earlier there were chances of all these or some of these flip flops getting into metastability. Now there is no guarantee that this will meet the setup and whole time of this flip flop because this is asynchronous with respect to this clock. So this can get into metastability ok now that is better than the earlier case but like we are kind of sampling the asynchronous input in one point but earlier it was sampled by different flip flops and maybe some will get into metastability some will not, some will miss trigger it was a mess ok it was you could not say what is a kind of what is happening at the output you know some could be 1, some could be 0, some could be in metastability and so on ok. Though the way I say you might think that it occurs so frequently it does not ok but you know that I want to highlight the problem of sampling an asynchronous input at multiple places with different path delay ok that is the issue. But our hope is that if this synchronising flip flop get into metastability by the next clock edge if it comes out of it and if there is enough time for it to propagate through combinational circuit and meet the setup time at the destination register it is ok ok. So that is the real hope but like this I want to state I can only kind of make a statement we are not going to analytical part of it. The fact is that the probability of a flip flop remaining in metastability decreases exponentially with time that means if this synchronising flip flop get into metastability as the time passes the chances of it coming out becoming exponentially more. So every nanosecond you give extra it is an exponential increase in the probability of it coming out of the metastability again I want you it is a probability I mean it is not certain like you cannot say after you give one nanosecond extra it is surely now with a double chance it is going to come out it may remain there ok there is a kind of logical problem in the last sentence but like I hope you got the picture. So the idea is that we give enough time for the synchronising flip flop to come out of the metastability in which from now onwards we can analyse that part the time available for it to come out of metastability is that in this part there is a clock period one clock period a clock comes and before the next clock edge this output should reach here but now if it get into metastability it should come out propagate and meet the setup time here ok. So how much time is available for it to come out of metastability that is the total clock period minus this time for the propagating through the combinational circuit minus the setup time at least by then it should come out ok suppose the clock period is 10 nanosecond setup time is 1 nanosecond and the combinational delay is 4 nanosecond. So put together it is 5 nanosecond so we are hoping that within 5 nanosecond after getting into metastability this comes out of it then there is no issue everything goes clean but that also tells us that if you are able to give more time like then there are more chances of it coming out of metastability. So it is a question of analysing it finding the probability and checking is that ok not only the probability maybe we have to convert that into the rate of metastable kind of failure metastability failure in the sense that it does not come out of metastability or the average time between such failures ok. So if it is large enough and if it occurs very seldom then it is ok ok. So but if that is not ok like you have the metastability resolution time for a single stage is t clock minus t com minus t setup then we have to increase it we cannot kind of at least from the outside we should not tamper with the clock period if you reduce it the system will suffer so we reduce this combinational circuit and we are trying to make it 0 and that is by you know that by putting another register in a chain here so that the output of this flip flop see only a flip flop not a combinational circuit. So that is double stage synchroniser so we put 2 flip flop now the time available for this to come out of metastability is clock period minus a setup time ok. But the price we pay is a 2 latency 2 clock period latency so if something happens here the worst case it will appear here after 2 clock period ok that is and of course in terms of area 2 kind of flip flops. Now suppose like you know kind of assess the probability and find that it is not enough the mean time between failure is not very large then we will be forced to kind of increase the clock period. But then this should not be affected so what we do is that we divide the clock for this part and retain the original clock for this sequential circuit or the data path mean data path. So that is what is shown here so you divide by n the clock is coming from here the main clock goes to the sequential circuit divided clock goes to the synchroniser and now we have the clock period is n into t clock because we are dividing by n then the clock period increases by n minus setup time so that should normally solve the problem n is and now the latency is 2 clock period of the divided clock which is n t clock. So 2 n t clock is a latency which can be high but n itself is 2, 3 or 4 things like that not a huge number but I said there is an issue here of a skew because there is a skew between this clock and this clock this source registers clock is a delayed version of the destination register clock. So like if you put the destination clock like that and the source clock is coming delayed okay so that it into the available clock period so available clock period for the propagation will be t clock minus this skew. So this skew will force 1 to increase the clock period okay that is not a good idea and we will definitely analyse the effect of skew in the clock period all that in the whole time violation and all that in different scenarios you know there could be different scenario depending on where which side the clock comes from. So we will analyse all that but at least I want to tell you the problem here so what we do is that to avoid that we put a d skew flip flop because now the skew come between 2 adjacent flip flop without any combinational circuit so it is kind of you know t clock minus skew should accommodate the tcq and the t setup which will be much smaller than this will be much smaller than this which is like this suppose if there is a skew here the situation is going to eat into the clock period and it is going to push the clock period up okay. So this would end and that is the d skew flip flop definitely it will add latency to the whole process now so it will be the latency you can work out it is a 2n t clock plus the t clock because this is not clocked by this kind of output of the counter but the input of the counter. So that is what we have looked at the last class I have repeated it because it is important that should get into your mind very clearly and this is a kind of standard solution almost people treat it as a kind of thumb rule wherever they see in a synchronous input they put 2 flip flop in a chain sometime they put 3 flip flop okay we will see why 3 flip flop. I do not quite agree with such kind of thumb rule like which is like many a times if you ask some people like you are sampling an input say the nico straight how many times you should sample they will say 10 this 10 is not a magical number you know that we have 10 fingers in the hand so we and we use a decimal system maybe because we have the 10 fingers in the hand because earlier the counting was you know based on the fingers and we will keep a tally for how many 10s and that is how the decimal system you know kind of arrows and before that people were like even for now for the time we use tall as a base. So there were like do decimal number system are there so what I am talking is that my argument is that if we add tall fingers then we will be all the time telling tall rounding off to tall everything. So just relying on thumb rule for design is a very bad thing and nowadays anyway it does not work because people want very optimized circuits in terms of area power dissipation delay and so on. But you should as a designer you should not resort to these kind of the magical tricks which is told by other people to do that where whenever you see an asynchronous input two flip flops or three flip flops without any questions ask not a good idea at least when you are working in a CMOS technology you know the kind of the delays you can expect in that technology and from there you go back and analyze it is the data is difficult to come by for metastability analysis. But I am hoping that you can get it at least look at some the published work on that and you know assure yourself that the scheme you put is enough or it is not kind of you cannot over designing and so on like where you the two double stages enough do not put multiple stage cycle multiple cycle synchronizer and so on. So let us come back to it instead of multiple cycle synchronizer sometime people put a kind of cascade at synchronize that means they will put three flip flop in a chain four flip flop in a chain and so on. The argument is that like say you can work out the probability like if you know the frequency of the clock and the setup and hold time window width and if you know the rate of change of the asynchronous input because this need not be kind of regular square wave. So the average rate or the maximum rate whatever depending on average rate should be good enough to take and then you can find out the rate of metastability entry then knowing the time that the fact that it will as you give more time the probability of it coming out increases exponentially with time. So the probability of it remaining there decreases exponentially with time okay. So from there we can find out what is the rate at which the second flip flop can get into metastability. And again do the same analysis for the second flip flop then you know what is the rate at which the third is kind of getting. But so this you know that the probability gets multiplied and the chances are becoming less and less for you know when you come towards the real sequential circuit the probability of that the last flip flop getting into metastabilities very very very less. So the mean time between failure will be a huge numbers in terms of maybe millions of years that should be good enough for large number of products which you make out of that design okay. So that is the basic idea about the cascaded synchronizer. The probability of metastable output reduces multiplicately that means that remaining in metastability reduces at each stage of the cascaded synchronizer. So some people do this instead of and it does not matter you know to be very frank like here like if you assume 4 flip flops okay. So you have a latency of 4 here okay. And you are using kind of 4 flip flops. And if you go back to this and you put a divide by 4 counter mode 4 counter then use 2 flip flop the latency is 2 and t clock which is nothing but the 4 clock cycle of this. So essentially kind of things are you know similar there is no difference it is a matter of kind of some choice only thing is that maybe this introduces as Q but in the cascaded there is no Q. So many times when you see some kind of solutions at least theoretically sometime it all means the same though the argument the structure is different. So one should look at it and try to make sense out of it okay. Now let us look at the effect of asynchronous input to FSM. Now I must warn you saying that there is no reason for you not to synchronize an asynchronous input in a very serious design maybe this concern is little bit old where one use to use kind of discrete kind of devices where a flip flop can be very costly maybe putting 2 flip flop will end up you will end up using a kind of 20 pin or 24 pin dip package which occupies. But nowadays the SOC chips are you know it is so small and there are so much density of transistors or gates not a problem not much of a problem but then it is nice to analyse at least academically we learn something in a complex situation what is the effect of the asynchronous input that is the only thing. So I would suggest that if there is an asynchronous input synchronize it rather than applying these techniques which I am going to say. So assume that this enable is an asynchronous input to a state machine and the state machine is like that as long as it is low remain there if it is high transit to the state with 11. Now mind you there are 2 flip flops Q1 and Q0 and now the situation is that we are not synchronizing this asynchronous input is going to the input of Q1 that flip flop and the 0th flip flop ok. Now because of the path delays difference in path delays this will be sampled at different point in time and you can imagine some time may it may happen that the Q1 transit to 1 and Q0 remain there because it is asynchronous or the opposite can happen the Q1 remain in 0 that means mistriggered it retain the previous value. But the Q0 as transit so it may happen that instead of the valid state 11 when the clock comes it transit to an kind of invalid you know state 10 or 01 and we do not know about the state and this could be kind of you know some state within the state diagram or it could be a new state whatever it is dangerous this is not like output races where it goes briefly there and come back it really mistriggers so you can imagine that you have a very complex state machine which loops and branch and all that suddenly you find that it is in some state and soon you find that the state machine is elsewhere and it continues from there and it is quite dangerous so you should never suppose if you are not synchronising the solution is not to do such a kind of assignment you should make it gray code so that only one of the flip flop change so even if there is a mistrigger it does not matter either it will remain 00 or it will transit to 01 so always do a go or no go like enable bar remain there enable go there but this should be gray coded if you are using an asynchronous input the similar situation can happen when the state machine is in say 00 and enable is an asynchronous input when it is 1 you transit to 01 when it is 0 the machine transit to 10 okay the state machine transit to 10 now since once again since it is we are talking about in this condition when enable is 1 q0 is changing the state when enable is 0 q1 is changing the state now you can imagine that this two flip flops sibling the one input with different path delay so it may happen that one instead of both changing one might change so you are end up you are hoping like like here sorry here only the q1 was changing here only the q0 was changing but q1 will kind of interpret it as 1 and will change and q0 also will interpret it as 1 and change then you will end up in another invalid state alright and this is quite dangerous again the solution is that never branch on asynchronous input like this like when it is 1 go to some state and 0 goes to other state you should always adopt a go no go structure when it is 1 transit when it is 0 remain there and this should be gray coded and as I said always it is even better to synchronize the asynchronous input without much botheration unless it is a very small circuit you are trying to suppose you are making a 4 bit counter and you have an up down input direction input from somewhere and if you double synchronize up down and direction then that will end up using for flip flop which is equal to the counter flip flop so but these situations are rare and if at all use a 4 bit counter it will be a very small application so that you should kind of remember so better to synchronize the synchronous input the related to it so now essentially what we have covered is the how to handle what is meta stability what is its effect on a flip flop and in a sequential circuit and data path how it affects and how to I mean where the problem really come in a sequential circuit or in a data path and we said the problem is asynchronous input the solution is to synchronize it so we have looked at the single stage synchronizer double stage synchronizer which improves the reliability or the probability aspect is improved then multiple cycle synchronizer or cascade synchronizer and we have seen what happens if you use a synchronous input in an FSM to make branching okay so we have seen one branching with multiple flip flops changing at the same time and one branching where depending on that input it make a decision to go to one side or the other side so that is what we have seen. Now a related kind of scenario is just something called reset recovery time okay and that is related to the asynchronous reset in a flip flop which is kind of this recovery time the notation is trc like t rec is a recovery time or trr okay the rr and rec is the subscript. So essentially this unit of kind of realized or learned and nevertheless it is a very very important aspect you would have assumed that at least the behavior of an asynchronous reset in a flip flop is that you assert that you make it active with a delay the queue goes to 0 and you remove it then the clock comes everything works fine is what we assumed okay. But there is a factor called recovery time that means that the reset recovery time is a minimum amount of time between the de assertion of this signal and the next clock edge active clock edge suppose the clock is coming the positive clock edge is coming here the research should be removed sometime before that okay otherwise this output can get in the metastability okay and this is quite serious because in a digital circuit there could be tens of thousands of flip flops okay or hundreds of thousands of flip flops and many a times at the power on a single reset we can reset all the flip flops okay most of the flip flop and it has to be reset because precisely same reason there is no guarantee that if you power on all the flip flops all the outputs are going to be neat you know like during the power on probably it can get into metastability. So reset is essential but if you do not meet the reset recovery time in flip flop again the metastability can happen in the flip flop so this is something which is overlooked and many a times one think of the assertion of the reset not the de assertion that is a problem like we are not asking the right question when you assert it fine the reset is driving the internal latches you know that is the problem like in an edge to get flip flop you have a master latch and a slave latch as I said that is and this reset asynchronous reset is directly going to the master latch and slave latch and resetting it and you can look at the circuit diagram for it then you will realize why that happens okay. Then in this course I do not have time to go into the details of that because it will eat up into our time so when that means they are driving the master and slave latch directly not going through this clock gating you know that is why it is asynchronous as soon as you assert with a delay this is reset the output is reset the clock does not matter because it is going directly into the latch and what the clock does is that it gates the input to the master latch so on. So we are bypassing that but now when you remove it may happen that you are kind of this is being input is driving the master latch and it is nearing that setup time it is close to that minimum time required for it to setup and you are messing it with through the reset it is trying to set through the D and we are removing it we have driven into 0 but we are removing it very close to the clock end so then this will not have enough time to set it up. So this should be and how much time is not the setup time because this is directly going to the latch so this is the kind of reset recovery is the time delay of that path where this reset is going and kind of resetting the latch okay that path like if you analyse the detailed circuit you can find a reset recovery time in terms of the gates involved and so on okay. But I hope you get a picture of the situation okay that is a problem like you can assert it any time with the delay it will be a kind of reset because it directly going it does not matter but when you remove it and it is near the positive clock end near the setup time then this thing can get into metastability because 2 drives are there and this does not have enough time to drive it to the proper value so this can get into metastability. So this has to be met and that is now so you would see that most people most vendors or designers would advise you to use synchronous reset because it is safe okay. But there is an like nice feeling about asynchronous reset saying that like the outputs the flip flops are reset without a 1 clock period delay because in the case of synchronous reset there could be a the worst case 1 clock period delay for it to reset okay. So if you want to reset something very quickly even before that for whatever reason maybe for kind of reliability fault tolerance or critical situation whatever this may be good.  But we can say this with certainty so let us not synchronize the leading edge but let us synchronize the trailing edge because if you do not synchronize the leading edge as soon as you assert it the reset happens and the problem is about removing it near to the clock edge. So if you synchronize to the clock edge it is removed after the clock edge and it will definitely meet the recovery time at the next clock edge so that is the idea. So that is what I have written here to retain the asynchronous reset behaviour only the trailing edge of the asynchronous reset should be synchronized so that is the game. So I am showing straight away a possible kind of solution there are many other but I am showing again the simplest one so assume there is a power on reset circuitry which has no kind of relation to the clock it comes so if it is kind of going to the asynchronous reset of the flop then it can cause metastability so we are synchronizing it. So this is the synchronized version of the reset it is an active high reset signal as the name suggests it is active high and you can imagine that this part is a delayed the worst case 2 clock period delayed version. So now the trailing edge comes much later now what we are doing is that we are oaring together okay so what happens is that the leading edge come as it is because it is oared with the delayed version but the trailing edge is synchronized version. So that is the clever trick for a active high reset now the same technique I hope you got this we have a double stage synchronizer for the power on reset. So this is a synchronized version but both the leading and trailing edge are not synchronized now what we do is that we kind of oared the original reset so that we get the leading edge as it is okay. So it is kind of oaring of a pulse with the delayed version of the pulse so you get the leading edge as it is and the trailing edge is a synchronized version which comes with a late kind of worst case latency of 2 clock period okay. Now for the active low signal that means this is kind of like it goes in the opposite direction it is 1 then it goes 0 and come back to 1 so we do we replace this AND or gate with an AND gate then we have done it okay. So it is a kind of 0 and a delayed version of 0 you know that for the AND gate any input is 0 the output is 0 so it is like as far as active low signal is concerned we have studied at the beginning if you remember we have looked at the difference between AND function and AND gate okay. Now this is an AND gate doing an OR function for an active low signal so for an AND gate the inputs and outputs are active low then it is doing an OR function and we have discussed this in the overview when we have kind of done a review of the basics we have done that and that is basically I have told at that point in time that is bringing in the De Morgan theorem into our concept okay. So this is the circuit for active low reset and naturally when in a chip there are lot of flip flops to be kind of reset so it is not a good idea that one wire you know drive everything you know you need to kind of buffer it properly for the because the fan out is limited if suppose the fan out of a gate is kind of say 50 then if there are 1000 then you need 20 buffers and now you have to balance it out it is not a good idea that you put a buffer then you drive 20 then again you buffer it so everything get delayed in a chain so you do a balance buffering and this goes to however money you want you put it parallely and these branches dry out sub sections of the circuit okay that is what is shown here. So essentially what we have looked at in the last few slides are the reset recovery time which is related to the metastability this is related to the asynchronous reset of a flip flop since the asynchronous reset is kind of driving the internal latches directly if there is no problem in driving it but while removing it if the clock edge is kind of is near to the clock edge then that is the set up path set up time of the input that can kind of interact with this drive and cause metastability in the output of that flip flop. So the solution is to synchronize but then it does not have an asynchronous behavior so again we said it is fine if you synchronize the trailing edge rather than leading edge and the solution we have looked at is that let us synchronize it but do an OR function okay. So in the case of an active high reset we use an OR gate and for an active low reset we use an AND gate and that was the solution. So kind of I wind this metastability synchronization part here so the essence is that when you find an asynchronous input you have some idea of what is the mean time between the failure with regard to the metastability or when there is when you encounter the asynchronous input and do the synchronization and we have not handled all possible ways of doing synchronization but this is by far the most useful part at least for a basic course I think that should be good enough and of course the reset recovery again we have discussed what to do which but this has to be applied kind of without any hesitation whatsoever okay. So that you can blindly kind of replicate whatever I have told. So let us move on so with this I have kind of I am winding up the digital design part of my course I have given you how to do a hierarchical top down design we have seen an example of a CPU then we have looked at what is data path what is controller what is a controller behavior what is a structure how to design that structure how to design a control algorithm whole methodology we have seen and we have looked at a case study where everything is applied all these principles are applied very maybe not a very complex case study but it was a kind of real life case study we have looked at all the practical steps then we have looked at the various issues in the finite state machine like power on reset clock frequency output races then we have looked at the problem of state assignment unused states then we have looked at how to reduce output delay by decoding from next state logic by encoding the output in the state bits all that and then we also have come to this problem of metastability in flip flop asynchronous input synchronizing it reset recovery so kind of I have covered and I have given a kind of a review of your basic you know basics you have learned in the undergraduate course so that you are familiar. So I think with this you should be able to kind of make a good design and we will take case study now we have learned VHDL we are kind of completing that and now what is remaining is the two devices device technologies the programmable logic devices and the field programmable gate array ok. Now once I complete that and bit of VHDL we have not covered the test bench then we can kind of look at the case studies where we play with the tool we implement that on a board I do not have too much time to show you lot of case studies and so on but then I will show something that should be enough and nowadays the people are kind of solving lot of problems you know like say in mathematics the people try to solve all kinds of problems and yes that is good because that makes you kick and that works out in examinations where in a short period of time you are able to solve more number of problems but in real life many a times that is not the situation that is not that in a fraction of a second you have to solve a problem ok. You have to solve a problem creatively elegantly without much cause without causing harm to the humans environment and things like that ok and so if when you work out some example case study that should have the real life element in it it should address all the basic issues involved so that then very few case studies are enough instead of doing all lot of projects you know there is some people resume is full of projects you know and that they have done this they have done that but nobody ask how come in a short time somebody is able to do so many projects and understand it well it is better you do fewer projects fewer things with a greater grasp and kind of a come out with the creative solution the elegant symbol solution you know the elegance you know when you say elegant it is a qualitative word you know we cannot kind of put numbers you know how to assess something is elegant but then it appeals that solution appeals something is elegant the music is elegant the way somebody kind of dress is elegant or when you look at the nature it is kind of beautiful and that can be applied that is a little bit qualitative aspect but then we are able to judge that something is elegant or not so that is just a kind of not justifying the fact that I am not able to kind of do lot of case study I can do it I have enough maybe I can kind of do a course full of case study there is no issue I have so much talk with me so that is not the point but that does not educate you increase your depth of knowledge and so on. So I am trying to balance it out you know now I am trying to you know stress on the device technology the programming language even with the programming language I have emphasised what it means what this construct means and what equations it creates what logical structure it creates and so on rather than you know simply dwelling on the all kinds of syntax and all kinds of jugglery with the syntax there is no point you know there is for a for an expert person even a symbol tool would suffice you know you have a very good photographer he is able to take a good photograph with a maybe a simpler camera but given to a novice even the most advanced camera he will not be able to do that that is true with any tool so the sophistication of the tool would not guarantee that what you design will be kind of efficient, elegant, fault tolerant and all that that comes with expertise the creativity and the logical thinking and systematic working and all that. So that you should keep in mind so my plan is now to complete this programmable logic devices I did not start it because we will be stuck in between it might take 2 or 3 lectures so we will handle the evolution of it the historical evolution of it the simple PLDs which are very rarely used nowadays but maybe there is a use in some cases for it and there is a complex PLD again the application is limited then we will have one part of the VHDL which is remaining is the test bench and there is another part called functions and procedure if time permits I will take it but it is one part of the language wherein it is very similar to a programming sequential programming language of course there is something called operator overloading which is related to synthesis but with whatever I have discussed you can kind of grasp it then we will go on with the FPGAs then we will play with the tool and the case studies and that should kind of wind up you know put everything together and give you a complete picture of designing the digital system practically and it will keep you to kind of start in the path of digital design I would not say that will kind of make you an expert in the front end VLSI design or front end FPGA design but that is a good starting point so that you can continue you can learn you can practice and do well so please now like we have covered almost two third part of the course the last part is coming up so please review whatever we have done learn well I wish you all the best and thank you.


Well, I was discussing the idea of forgetting and remembering, and it's when you become a better forgetter that you become a better rememberer. Forgetting helps you remember. As you forget the world, as you forget the ego belief system, simultaneously you remember heaven, or you remember right-mindedness. Pay no attention to this clumping jaws behind the screen. On the screen. I am speaking to you from out of time. Pay no attention to the clumping jaws that seem to be beloved this figure. So learn to be a good forgetter. In order to remember. I still have. Even when we start to get to this depth, I still have the sense that this is feeling enough. I want to know more. I want to go further. I want that to happen. And yet, that's when I really start to become aware of the fear of letting go of the world and letting go of what's familiar and seems to be, you know, like just this room, you know, these bodies here and all that that seems comfortable. And it seems like I need some reassurance that what's, you know, what is real is going to be familiar. And instead of, I guess, just words, the words are in there and you can read them, but there's, I haven't had that experience yet. It seems to me what I keep hoping for is some intermediate experiences that assure me that it is okay to let go of the world. But, you know, it kind of just needs to be like that would be helpful to do that a few times. Well, if you want those, how could you not have those? To me, the whole thing is when I talk about the rings of the mind, how desire is at the center. Desire is like your altar and the beliefs and the thoughts and the emotions and the perceptions spring out from that. When the altar is defiled, then you have beliefs that aren't of God. You have thoughts that don't come from God. You have emotions that don't have anything to do with God. You have perceptions on the outer ring that may even seem comfortable and familiar, but they are distorted and very twisted and very unstable. And so if you really desire that, how could you not have that? And that's one of the things we've been going over and over is that that's the only thing you really need have is that desire, that willingness. That it was your desire that brought those experiences. It was the desire that brought that to your mind. It wasn't the action of putting some pills into the body that brought that about, but it was your desire of your mind. That was a witness to your desire for awakening. No different than we described when somebody seemed to have a near-death experience. Or they seemed to have a mystical high, like they talk about sometimes runners high. They try to explain it with endorphins and all the stuff, body chemistry and this and that. And, oh no, that's not the source of the mystical experience. It's always the mind. And I would say it goes back to when you first came, the very first sentence that you, when you came in and we were going over, it was talking about the reasoning of the world which was saying that you are the cause of what I do, and while you attack I must be innocent as if there was a cause or an attack outside my own mind. And basically the sentence that you walked right in on, so to speak, was, yet it seems sensible because it looks as if the world were hurting you. And so it seems as if there is no need to go beyond the obvious in terms of cause. See, that's when you're feeling, I will say, lack of energy or like, oh I don't know if I want to look at my mind so closely. I'd rather have a nice breezy, breezy relaxing day doing some other stuff than to look so closely at my mind. It's because the mind believes and really it seems as if there is no need to go beyond the obvious in terms of cause. Well, the mind figures the reason I'm tired is because I only got so many hours of sleep or I didn't get enough stuff, the proper foods to eat or I didn't talk about exercise. Like you said, I didn't get any exercise and so I've noticed a feeling like that. All of those are part of the thinking of the world, the things that know why there's a fatigue or why there's, it's kind of like I've heard before. I have just, I sometimes just don't have the perseverance with the course and the lack of interest where I start to get more lackadaisical with it. I need to surround myself with people who are more intense or who are studying the course more in this than that as if somehow magically by having other bodies around that are reading or talking about the words would intensify one's desire to study the course. It may seem that way but what's happened when people have come together in community to try to live the course is they come together and the very thing that they thought would intensify their desire, they might go run into corners and get me out of here. I know, I don't want to, because they don't want to look so closely at their mind and at their own thoughts and beliefs. So there's all these subtle ways and so the answer that Jesus gives to, and so it seems as if there is no need to go beyond the obvious in terms of cause, Jesus says there is indeed a need to go beyond the obvious. To go beyond the back of the thinking. Yes. And when you say, I really would like some intermediate experiences of it, not just the words, the words are kind of like, if you think of words as just tools or as symbols for the mind, they're just symbolic too. Everything that you're hearing just has the meaning that you gave to it. So if my desire becomes so single and so focused and so intense and so clear that then everything that I perceive will be a witness to that, I'll be able in short to hear the Holy Spirit in everything. All things are echoes of the voice for God. All things are lessons that God would have me learn. That turns it around, to me it turns it around from thinking, oh it's great, we have all these sessions and we talk and we have all these words, but I want the experience, you know, kind of separating them apart. I don't see, for me, experience is not apart from the words. The words when I have my intention to be truly helpful, the words just like flow or the words are just symbolic of the experience. What I'm feeling is the experience. The words are like just kind of coming off like it's offshoots of it. We'll talk about that a lot too because that's been one of the things we've been going into is we actually were talking about that this morning before you came was the whole saying of making an idea of something. You can take an idea from the course of the one I was using this morning is the truth is true and only the truth is true. Nice idea. And yet, as long as there's still backward thinking involving sexuality, involving exercise, involving food, involving all the seeming aspects of the world, as long as there's backward thinking, as long as I believe there's something positive in the world, what meaning does the truth is true and only the truth is true have? It's just kind of like an idea. Sentimentally, like, oh, that's sentimentally that sounds good. But experience seems to be divorced from the idea. So we just investigate everything that seems to stand in the way from that being an experience. I was sitting on this morning just feeling like I had just been really tired lately and then really getting in touch with actually a slice of depressed feeling of depression. And then I started to get in touch with feeling that it was because I don't feel like I have any future and yet I'm not sure, you know, I've gotten rid of this projected future and yet I'm not sure what I replaced it with. And then I just, you know, I knew that even if you follow that out, I mean, the depression can't be of the end.  You know, and I started to think, you know, I just got to stay with, you know, my purpose and, you know, get over there and do a session and I do feel much better now. And the logistic meaning came up yesterday if you were here or not. The discussion was for the pamphlets to have a mission statement. And I was suggesting that there'd be a mission statement drawn up and Tom just said, well, I'm not clear and I don't think any of us are clear. So David, why don't you write the mission statement for it? And so this morning I came through the mission statement, a little short, concise little thing. And Tom was coming down and was joking and he was saying, I didn't know what I was. Now I have something. So you feel depressed and you think you have no future. There you go. That's the anchor. That can be your anchor.


If what we really want to do is scale production of seafood, we can't be just solely reliant on wild stocks. The world population is growing at an exaggerated rate, and that healthy protein, which is fish meat, also has to come from other sources. And what we do is try to contribute that little grain of sand that helps the sea, providing sustainable crops. Our offshore site is about six kilometres offshore, and about 70 metres deep of water. And at this site we have our pens. I'm a business partner. He was a lot more of a discerning pallet than I am. And so it was his job to take these various fish home and sample them. He came back the next morning and he walks into the yard, the tank yard, waving his arms at his eyes, wide like this. Neal, Neal, you're not going to believe it. This fish, this Kampachi, we're going to build the company on this fish. This fish is fantastic. We're like, really? Yes, yes, come, let's taste one. So we went over to the tank and scooped another one out, banged it on the head, sliced some sashimi up then and there, and from the very first taste it was wow. It's a mix in between the characteristics of a bluefish and a whitefish. So that allows you to be more creative. So you can eat a raw, you can eat it cooked, or you can make a sashimi or a ceviche, and it's a really interesting texture in the mouth. The quality is not something exotic or something necessarily wild. Quality is something that is made and raised with respect. The best thing about my job is that it's surrounded by nature, with incredible conditions for marine aquaculture. We are in open sea conditions, where the currents are very strong, the waters are very clean, and the fish is in its natural habitat, without any problems with densities, contaminations. Produce 100 times the current level of seafood production from offshore aquaculture. The aquaculture already exceeds the amount of fish caught in the sea. I don't know if it's going to replace everything, but I do think it's going to give it a breath so that the sea returns and produces the amount of fish they had. Our relationship with the oceans has not been a happy one, but there is a need for optimism. Let's start to think of solutions. There's that line from the Mary Oliver poem. What will you do with your one wild and precious life? And I like to paraphrase that. What will we do with our one wild and precious planet?


The first US lunar lander in more than 50 years rocketed toward the Moon Monday, launching private companies on a space race to make deliveries for NASA and other customers, Astrobotic Technologies lander caught a ride on a brand new rocket, United Launch Alliance's Vulcan. The Vulcan streaked through the Florida pre-dawn sky, putting the spacecraft on a roundabout route to the Moon that should culminate with an attempted landing on February 23.The Pittsburgh company aims to be the first private business to successfully land on the Moon, something only four countries have accomplished. Looking good, we're rolling off on the SRBs and we have cut off on the SRBs coming up on Jettison in approximately 30 seconds. Seeing expected PU activity on the boost remains and we have separation of