Fish and Freaks, welcome back. Welcome back to the channel. I'm here with you. Today is Friday in the world. I do an often upload on Fridays, usually because people are out doing their things, getting ready for their adventure trips for the weekend and whatnot. Today I wanted to give you guys an update on life and the current situation I said in the last video that I was gonna update you on because I am a man of my word. First of all, I'd like to point out a couple things. One of them being this awesome guitar over here. It is in the shape and form of a black crappie. An amazing piece, art piece, and it plays. It plays pretty well actually. That was done by Mr. Kalkins. And he makes guitars. He makes them for Bassmaster Classic Winners and all sorts of people. He's a fan of the channel. He's a good man. And he built one of these guitars. I just thought, man, it's pretty fitting for the Fish Cave. And as we go into the winter months when it gets really cold, y'all, I'll probably be doing more videos inside of here because it's nice and cozy. Ultimate goal is to just do more content in here. Do more videos, do more podcasts, do more live streams for y'all. I've actually got some new wood art pieces that are being assembled, drawn out, built. This is gonna be my project for the weekend.  This comes with those super tall straight trees you see in Brazil. It's sustainably sourced. Don't worry, I didn't chop it down myself. And it looks beautiful, kind of like cedar, but I just love that it is a little piece of Brazil.  And I also just learned a lot about life when I was down there. And I thought it'd be cool to have where I edit my little edit station be built out of Brazilian tiger wood. And I'm gonna build it myself and kinda walk you guys through that. I'm not gonna do a series of videos on that. I'm just gonna do a whole build and make one video on it. And it's got a cool twist on the furniture piece. Side of things. Also just rigging this place out to be better. And today is also the anniversary or the day before or day after. I'm not really sure of when I had my brain surgery, guys. 365 day-ishes ago, I had a very intelligent, skilled man inside of my brain doing magical things and taking old Willis, the tumor out. And thanks to you guys. Thanks to all your support emotionally and financially. If you don't know the story about all that, you can go back and watch all the videos, which have just kind of gone viral. A lot of people come to the channel from those videos. They say it was inspirational.  It was. So I wanna try to do one of these shirts every year. Not just because of that, just because I also love fishing and I love this statement. And it has kind of set the tone for my channel and as I started out in my career as a fisherman and now doing creating content. The new Make Every Cast Count. Sweatshirts. Yes, this is the first sweatshirt I've ever done. And tees are now available for you guys. And this is another hand-drawn design. It looks amazing. Last year, it was the one-hand up with a jig in the mouth. Of course, that's my favorite. That's my favorite. Especially when you're talking about Make Every Cast Count, targeting, throwing that jig. But it's a metaphor for life. Make everything you do count. This one has got Old Big Mondo on there. Two-hander, just a different way to look at it and very well done. That's available for you guys. Make sure to visit it top of the description. It helps out the channel. It helps out me and Stephanie and Amy. I'm gonna give you guys the gist of the situation here. You guys know that Google owns YouTube and YouTube incentivizes its creators to make content where they place ads on your videos and the more you upload and all that kind of stuff, the more ads and potentially the money you make. And anyway, the last few months, actually the last three months, my AdSense dollars have been on hold. So basically, the way that Make a Living has halted. And it's because someone hacked my account job. So I wanted to get this story out there to notify any creators that are out there that might run into this issue because even though I am missing a part of my brain, I still feel like I'm pretty cognizant of most things. And this one slipped under the radar on me and it got me and it allowed someone else to take over my AdSense account. So basically anything that I've been making in recent history on YouTube has gone to someone else. Someone else's bank account, which is quite a bummer as a YouTube creator. Not gonna let this get me down, guys. As you know, I'm a tough cat, I'm a tough fighter, but it just puts a bummer on things. Someone hacked into my account and I'm not sure how that happened. Maybe the person's watching right now. How'd you do that? Let us know in the comments. Jokes and Google is working on this, working on trying to figure this problem out to try to restore that part of my channel and just put in some safety measures. So thank you, Google, for getting on that. But let me tell you guys, when you try to contact Google, if you can imagine even a channel of my size, it is still very difficult. I mean, trying to get to an actual person, it's a longer story than that. But always make sure to do your two-step verification on YouTube and check to see if you're a creator, if you've got other managers on your channel. To your knowledge, if you're the only person that has access to your account, there shouldn't be anybody else on there, unless you're with a network. And if you trust that network, everything's good. But I'm just telling you what happened to me, someone snuck through the back door, made themselves an administrator, changed my absence to theirs, and then I was making money. For then. Also, Google advised me not to upload videos until the situation had been resolved. So I've had some breaks here lately, and I have content ready to upload, and I just haven't uploaded it because of that. And I'm not sure I will because it's kind of irrelevant at this point. But I still gotta upload because if I don't, you guys are gonna think I'm dead. I'm hoping that the person can be identified, but I don't know. It's a crazy dark world on the internet. And my point is be careful if you're a YouTuber and monitor the things that are going on with your channel. Now to delve a little bit deeper into the monetization conundrum. Delve, I think that's a word. Yeah, to delve a little bit deeper, I've tried to rely less and less on Google AdSense monetization over the past years, because channels similar to mine that do outdoor activities and things of that nature may be considered offensive to some people out there, fishing and hunting. My fear is that eventually fishing will be considered offensive because of, I guess, hooking fish in the mouth or maybe taking them home and eating them, I don't know. And that's just a way of life for me, but you think four or five years from now things can be different. I don't wanna rely on that to feed my family. I just wanna be myself and bring you guys my experiences from my eyeballs and try to tell the story the way it was, not fake it, to please monetization advertising. Anyway, that's probably a little deep for most everybody, but I just wanted to give you guys the gist of what has been going on here at the channel. The only unfortunate thing right now is what I just told you about and the massive flooding that we've had that has flooded the lakes. So I will not be able to fish around here for a while. And in fact, next week I will be traveling to the great state of Louisiana to go fishing. I'm gonna be going after red fish with Mr. Scott Martin who has a TV program that he invited me to be on and he also has a YouTube channel. Probably one of the best fishing scenarios out there, Louisiana I think is highly underrated. Not enough people go to Louisiana and catch all the fish that they have to catch over there. It's insane. So I can't wait to take you guys along for that and get away from this flooding for a while till it subsides and then I can just get right back to being around North Texas and going fishing and hunting around here. Now I'm gonna leave you guys on a positive note before I go in honor of one year of surviving brain surgery and I'm feeling good, man. I am feeling very good and very blessed. Still have all my functionality and I still kind of look handsome. Not everything is peaches and cream.  Now some things come at you, you know right away. You're like, yep, I got that. I can handle that, no problem. Some things are overwhelming and you don't know if you can handle or not. And that's okay. What you gotta do is you gotta have faith and you gotta persevere. Don't let anything get you down. When you get down, you get depressed, it starts to turn into a cycle and that's where things get really bad. That's where you need help from your friends. That's where faith comes in, you need a compass. Everyone goes through these type things. The two things that have helped me during rough times don't get comfortable. There's a lot of people that get comfortable and then when harder, tougher challenges come out of them, they forget, they lose their grit. So it's always good to diversify yourself, put yourself in more awkward situations, I guess you could say, to learn more and learn more from other people. And then that'll prepare you in the future and always have a good attitude, positive attitude. It's amazing when you think positively, you talk positively, you hang out with positive people, it just starts coming, it's just positive. It's positive all the time and then that'll help you get through those situations. So that's just my little advice for the day to end on a good note and I'm gonna get through this little problem that I'm having today. It ain't no big thing. So I just wanna thank you guys again for all the support on the channel. Don't forget to get the Make Every Cast Count new V2, the version two shirt and I hope to have one of these every year. Next year is gonna be even better and we'll just make it a little tradition. And of course, I hope wherever you are, you're having a very blessed day, y'all. Thank you for being here. More hunting action coming at you with Mullet Man and Outlaw. And it's always a good time in here, camp with your buddies. So keep it locked right here, y'all. Hit all the ding dongs for the notifications. Thinking that they still go out, I'm not sure. Just click it to be safe. And I love you guys. Thanks for being here. I'll see you tomorrow.


In this lecture, we will learn about the following things. We will learn about the nature of a kind of radiation called x-rays. We'll learn a little bit about the production of x-rays, and finally we'll look at the scattering of x-rays by matter and the implications for the nature of electromagnetic radiation. Now, x-rays were discovered serendipitously in 1895, while Wilhelm Röntgen was experimenting with what are then known as cathode rays, and which we would now simply know as electrons. He was using a device that would boil electrons off a metal using a very strong electric field, and he observed some distance away from the apparatus that a special phosphorescent screen was glowing even though there should be no radiation from the experiment actually reaching the screen. And so he became obsessed with trying to understand this phenomenon, and after careful experimentation, he decided that he had isolated a new kind of radiation that was heretofore unknown, and using the variable for an unknown quantity in math, which is usually x, he coined the term x-rays to describe these. Now, one of the things that he observed during his experiments was that if he allowed the x-rays to pass through his hand, it would cast a shadow on a screen behind the hand that showed only the bones of his hand. And in fact, this led to him attempting to make the first what we would now call medical x-ray in 1895. He used the hand of his then spouse, Anna Ludwig, and her hand famously is the first medical x-ray ever known to have been recorded in the history of science. You can see here the dark areas that look very much like the bones of the hand. The knuckles are up here. She's clearly wearing a ring or something around her finger here, and the tips of the fingers are up here. The thumb is off to the side. And for public presentation, Rentgen made a much nicer version of this picture using a different hand and a different experimental apparatus. But essentially, this is the birth of medical imaging, as we think of it now, non-invasive imaging using radiation or something else to see inside the body. Now, we now know that x-rays are a kind of electromagnetic radiation. They're a very short wavelength light. You can't see them with your eyes, but if you have the right instrumentation, which Rentgen did when he serendipitously discovered them, you can induce a signal in something that can be seen with the eyes. They have wavelengths that range at their smallest between 0.01 nanometer, all the way up to 10 nanometers. Now, as Rentgen discovered, they easily penetrate common low density materials, think cardboard, skin, muscle. Most x-rays will pass through those undeflected unstopped. Now, if you use more dense material between you and the source of x-rays, then, of course, what he observed was that more of the x-rays are stopped. So the light regions here are places where x-rays easily made it through. The dark regions are places where many fewer x-rays penetrated through the hand in order to get to the imaging device on the other side, in this case, photographic film. So lead, bone, this is more dense than skin, muscle, paper, cardboard, and so it's more likely to stop or scatter x-rays. Now, you can imagine that these are insanely useful, not just for practical applications, but for all kinds of interesting studies of the natural world, and they would themselves become a key object of study, and ultimately would lead the way toward understanding more about the particle-like aspects of light's behaviors. Now, let's talk about Arthur Holly Compton and x-ray scattering experiments. As I mentioned in the previous lecture, in the late 1800s and early 1900s, there were not many notable physicists from the United States. Now, that's as compared to the then European powerhouse of both education and research that was long and well established across the Atlantic Ocean. Now, one of the physicists who became very well known in the early 1900s was Ohio-born Arthur Holly Compton. Interestingly, his Ph.D. thesis was in part on the reflection of x-rays. After his Ph.D., he received National Research Council support and was then free to travel and do research abroad, and he selected to conduct work at the then famous Cavendish Laboratory in Cambridge, England, and he did this in 1919. Now, there he would experiment with very short-wavelength light, including x-rays and gamma rays, laying the groundwork for his eventual discovery of what is now known as the Compton Effect. He returned to the United States in the early 1920s and became faculty at Washington University in St. Louis, and it was there that he observed definitively and methodically now what we refer to as the Compton Effect, that x-ray quanta, scattered by free electrons, experience a lengthening of their wavelength after the scattering, and that this lengthening is a strong function of the angle at which the light is scattered. So how to explain this? This is a very particle-like picture of an x-ray striking a free electron, causing the electron to scatter, and itself being scattered. Now, in classical electromagnetism, a wave would come in, it would start an electron oscillating. The electron would oscillate sympathetically, but this shouldn't result in a change in the wavelength of the radiation, like waves on the surface of a pond. It'll make things on the surface start to bounce up and down, but the wave itself doesn't change wavelength when it scatters through these things. On the other hand, Compton could only explain this phenomenon by analyzing this scattering process from a more particle-like viewpoint, where the x-ray quanta have energy and momentum before and after the collision with the free electron, and that because the energy and momentum of the quantum is changed, the wavelength is changed. And he came up with a precise mathematical formula to relate all of these changes. So we can hypothesize, as Compton did based on Einstein's 1905 photoelectric effect work, which was itself based on Max Planck's blackbody spectrum work, that the x-ray incident on the electron, which I've labeled here I for the purposes of the coming notation, before scattering carries a total momentum that's given by E equals PC for the incident momentum and energy. This can be related through Planck's relationship to the frequency of the radiation, so h Planck's constant times fi, the initial frequency of the radiation. And if we want to get wavelength into this to consider shifts in the wavelength of the scattered light, then we can convert this into hc over lambda i, where lambda i is the initial wavelength. Now this allows us to write the momentum of the incident x-ray as the initial momentum is Planck's constant divided by the wavelength. So E is most neatly equal to h times f, but P, the momentum of the quantum is most neatly related to the wavelength by h divided by the wavelength lambda. The scattering process then occurs, and the final scattered light quantum carries a different momentum, P final equals h over lambda final. Now the initial electron state we could take as being at rest, and so it has no velocity in the initial state. But the final state involves an electron that's now been scattered at some angle, phi, that we'll write down later. Now it has a total speed u final, and thus it has a total momentum. Now I'm going to be careful here. I'm not going to assume that this is necessarily a slow moving electron, and in fact in reality in the Compton scattering experiments, these electrons come out with a whopping great amount of momentum, putting them very close to the speed of light. So close that it is obviously safe to use the relativistic definition of momentum, that is the gamma factor that's a function of the speed of the ejected electron times the mass of the electron times its speed. Now to analyze this as a scattering process involving the collision of a x-ray with a stationary electron leading to a moving electron and a scattered light quantum, we need to only conserve total energy and then momentum in the x and y direction. So x is here clearly labeled as the horizontal direction positive to the right, y is the vertical direction, and it would be positive upward vertically. So let's go ahead and do this. Let's start from conservation of momentum in the horizontal or x direction. This is a closed and isolated system, so the initial momentum of the system, that includes the x-ray and the stationary electron, must be equal to the final momentum of the system, that now involves the scattered light quantum and the moving electron. So if we substitute in with the equations for the initial and final momentum of the light quantum, and we put in the component of the velocity of the electron along the horizontal axis, we wind up with this equation, which removing the zero, because the electron in the initial state is not moving, simplifies to this equation here. Now let me comment on a few things. First of all, the initial momentum of the x-rays entirely along the x-axis, but only a part of its final momentum lies along the x-axis. And so that's given by hc over lambda f, its total final momentum, times the cosine of the scattering angle theta. Now there's another angle in the problem. It's the angle between the horizontal and the electron that gets scattered, and that's denoted phi. And because of the picture up here, we're only considering the horizontal component of the electron's momentum, and that's given by gamma mu cosine phi. So, so far nothing exciting going on. It's just breaking down the kinematics of the x-ray and the final state light quantum and the scattered electron all along the x-axis. And that's about as far as we can go right now without knowing things like phi, the scattering angle of the electron. We need more equations. And so we're going to turn to conserving momentum in y. So let's go ahead and write down the vertical conservation of momentum for the same problem. I'll proceed through this relatively quickly. Again, the initial total momentum in the y-direction must be equal to the final total momentum in the y-direction. There is no initial momentum in the y-direction. The x-rays moving entirely along the x-axis. The unscattered electron has no velocity, so the initial state is all zeros. And the final state has two pieces. The positive vertical component of the scattered light quantum and the negative vertical component of the scattered electron. And so we can consolidate the zeros on the left-hand side and we wind up with this equation here. Now we have sines instead of cosines for the two scattering angles in the problem. Now we could use this to solve for phi, or at least sine of phi, where it's already looking a bit nasty. We can already see that this is going to be a bit of a lift in algebra. Let's see if the conservation of total energy in the system holds any comfort for us in attempting to get at a singular equation that relates the initial wavelength, the final wavelength, and the scattering angle of the light quantum. Well, we're going to conserve total energy. Total initial energy must be equal to total final energy. We can plug in the total energy of the initial x-ray, hc over lambda i. Now remember, the total energy of the unmoving electron is not zero. This is special relativity. Mass energy is internal energy and is therefore just energy. So we have to put in the rest mass energy of the electron. The final light quantum has an energy hc over lambda f, and the final scattered electron has a total energy given by gamma times the mass of the electron times c squared. This involves both kinetic and internal mass energy. Now we can then just rewrite this equation without the conservation of energy stuff on the left, and we arrive at this equation here relating initial and final energies. Nothing's really simplified. So there's not a lot of comfort here. It's going to be an algebraic lift, but these are the pieces that Compton would have worked with and in fact did work with in order to try to understand his scattering experiments. From his experiment, he would have known three things. The incident x-ray wavelength, lambda i, the scattered light wavelength, lambda f, and the angle at which light is scattered, theta. So the question is, of course, can we use algebra, possibly pages of it, in order to relate these things using this hypothesis of a particle-like scattering process between light quanta and an electron? And can we then make a prediction for the relationship between these three things? Well, the answer is yes, and I'm going to leave the lengthy algebra to the viewer or reader of all of this stuff here, but basically we're going to eventually find by working through all of this what Compton found, and that is that the predicted relationship between the final and initial wavelength and the scattering angle is given by this very nice-looking equation here. In fact, what we find out is that from Compton's analysis of this process, it suggests that the difference in wavelengths after and before the scatter will depend only on the scattering angle of the light and some constants of nature, h, the mass of the electron, and the speed of light. Compton ultimately confirmed that this was a correct description of these experiments by doing his own experiments and testing this idea. Now, there are some implications from the Compton effect, which is described in this formula. An undeflected x-ray, that is an x-ray that goes straight through the system with an angle theta equals 0, will experience no shift in wavelength. The cosine of 0 is 1, 1 minus 1 is 0, there is no difference between the initial and final wavelength of the x-ray. That doesn't lead to a big surprise, but more interesting perhaps is that if you have a completely deflected x-ray, one whose scattering angle is 180 degrees or pi radians, that is a so-called backscatter comes straight back at the source of the x-rays. It will experience the maximal possible shift in wavelength, and that corresponds from a energy perspective to the largest achievable kinetic energy for the electron. That's the most kinetic energy a scattered electron is ever going to get is when you have a perfect backscatter of the x-rays as a result of losing energy to the electron and coming out at this 180 degree scattering angle. Now Compton in the course of doing his experiments did observe scattered light at angles other than those expected from simply scattering off the electrons, and from this he determined that some of the x-rays were scattering not off of just electrons in the atoms, but entire atoms themselves. That is, you could rework the algebra that would lead to the Compton scattering formula not by putting in the mass of a scattered electron, but by putting in the mass of an entire scattered atomic nucleus or atom, and if you do that you'll find that scattering at the same angle leads to a much smaller wavelength shift because the mass of an atom is much bigger than the mass of an electron, and that causes the wavelength shift to get much much much smaller at the same angle, but nonetheless you will see scattered light with an entirely different set of wavelengths, albeit at a lower rate at that same angle, when sometimes the x-rays scatter off of whole atoms and not just electrons. What this also implied was that for light with wavelengths or frequencies at the level of x-rays, which does span a large space of wavelength ranges, scattering of the light behaves more like scattering particles off of other particles, like bouncing tennis balls off of bowling balls or something like that, rather than waves off of particles where waves would cause sympathetic oscillations in the particles, but wouldn't change the wavelength of the original wave. So this flies in the face again of the purely wave hypothesis of light, and it seems that under these conditions a much better and more accurate description of the way that light behaves is as if it behaves as a large collection of quanta more than as a collection of waves. Now this all has deeper implications that stem from the Compton effect. Let's take everything from the last few lectures together into one coherent picture. All together the black body problem, the photoelectric effect and Compton scattering point toward a complex set of aspects of light behavior. Light isn't just a wave and it's not just a unit or discrete thing, like a particle. Under some conditions light behaves exactly according to classical Maxwell equation theory, waves scattering off of or otherwise interacting with and causing oscillations in matter. That behavior was well established by the late 1800s. Electromagnetic waves really can behave like waves, but under different conditions suddenly one can observe that light behaves more accurately according to a particle description, a quantum description that light is discretized in some way not continuous like a wave. So in that case it's better described as a collection of quanta, the photon, so many photons all acting together and that can be thought of as particles interacting with the particles that themselves compose matter, electrons, whole atoms and so forth. So what ultimately resulted from all of this was that there are particle light aspects of light's behavior that tend to correspond more often to when the wavelength of the light was very short, that is very high frequency, whereas the wave-like aspects of light's behavior seemed to manifest or correspond more when the wavelength is very long, that is the radiation has very low frequency. Somewhere in that space of wavelengths and frequencies between very long and very short there's a transition between these sets of behavior, wave-like and particle-like. But what defines short and long? That's a very arbitrary distinction. Something that's hot to one person may actually be kind of chilly to another. Think about the way that offices are heated or air conditioned. Some people find the temperature in a typical office setting perfectly fine and acceptable. Some people have to put a blanket over themselves to stay warm because they view it as chilly. Okay, but how do we define short and long to understand when the wave and when the particle-like phenomena are applicable? When it turns out that the answer has to do with the dimension D or size or scale of the system with which the light interacts. So the longness or shortness of wavelength or the highness or lowness of frequency is when compared to the size of the system with which the light interacts. If the wavelength of the light is much much greater than the dimensions of the system. Think long wavelengths that are far in excess of the size of atoms for instance. Then it turns out that wave-like behavior rules. The atom experiences light like a wave. If the wavelength is much much smaller than the dimensions of the system then the system experiences light more like being crashed into by a particle where all the momentum and energy is transferred at once. Particle-like behavior rules. Now in the middle as the wavelength becomes comparable to the size of the system things get very complicated and you have to be extremely careful and have an accurate theory in order to actually predict what's going to happen in that case. So there are some extreme cases. The wavelength is much smaller than the dimensions of the system. The wavelength is much longer than the dimensions of the system. Those are easy to handle when absolutely particle-like behavior or absolutely wave-like behavior manifests. In the middle things get dicey and in order to describe systems which have comparable sizes to the wavelength of light for instance you need the right theory. We don't quite have it yet. Now let's talk about the sizes of things as a primer for what's to come in our thinking about the interactions of light and matter. To probe the scales of things with sizes larger than a virus and we can see from this chart over here that a virus has a size scale that's roughly a hundred nanometers. You can find that it's sufficient to use visible light. Bacteria have sizes of about one micron a thousand nanometers in size. Red blood cells ten thousand nanometers are about ten microns in size. Hairs about a hundred microns or a hundred thousand nanometers in size. Ants are ten to the six nanometers. Baseballs are about ten to the eighth nanometers. We're in the realm of the macroscopic. Macroscopic here meaning larger than the wavelength of visible light. So this helps us to understand a little bit about why it is that we didn't get ourselves into trouble with large-scale descriptions of motion and radiation, a la Newton's laws and Maxwell's equations, when we were dealing with things that had sizes that were much smaller than the wavelengths of light that we were using to interact with them. Looking at a bacterium or a red blood cell or a hair follicle with a microscope is straightforward because the wavelength of visible light is much smaller than all of those things and so it simply scatters off of them and we can resolve the sizes of those structures quite easily. When you have a wavelength that's smaller than the structure you're looking at, you can resolve the features of that structure. But to probe viruses and DNA or hemoglobin or macromolecules like glucose, for instance, you need x-rays. You need to get down to sizes that are about the level of one to five to ten nanometers or so. In those cases you're going to need something like x-rays if you want to resolve the structure of glucose, hemoglobin, DNA, which are obviously essential to understanding modern biological functioning. So x-rays are your friend when you want to probe structures that are smaller than bacteria. X-rays will allow you to see, if you have the right instrumentation to reveal them to the eye, these sorts of distance scales. But if you want to probe atoms and molecules, you need to really push your x-rays. You need to go down to the shortest x-ray lengths about 0.01 nanometer or so. The scale of atoms is at the level of 0.1 nanometers or 10 to the minus 10 meters. So x-rays can be comparable to or smaller than but not by much the size of an atom. And so the particle-like aspects of light begin to emerge naturally at this scale. It's no surprise that the behavior of x-rays, which is an electromagnetic radiation, became very particle-like when we started looking at them interacting with atomic systems like the atoms in metal and the electrons in those atoms. Those things turn out to have scales that are roughly comparable in size or a little bit bigger than the kinds of x-rays that we're scattering off of them. And so that's when we got ourselves into trouble when it came to the theory of light and how it's supposed to behave when it interacts with matter. It's when the size of the light got to be smaller than the size of the thing that we were smashing the light into, and suddenly we needed a slightly different description of light in order to understand all that. Now just to tease things, if you wanted to probe the nucleus of an atom, there we're talking about sizes at the level of 10 to the negative 15 meter or one femtometer. And for that, x-rays are just too big. You're not going to resolve things of the size of a nucleus of an atom using x-rays. Instead, you need something with a wavelength that's really short, like gamma ray radiation. Or even other things that as we'll learn, turn out to have even smaller wavelengths than gamma rays. Let's revisit the phenomenon of the interference of light. We've looked at this in class in the context of the Michelson-Morley experiment. What we saw in an in-class demonstration was that light that is forced to pass through a very narrow opening will diffract. You'll get a pattern on a screen some distance away from the slit that the light passes through that shows light and dark spots. The bright spots are where the waves have constructively interfered and their amplitudes have added up. The dark spots are where the waves have been out of phase with each other and destructively interfere. Black areas are places where the waves completely cancel each other out. This computer simulation imagines sending in light waves toward a barrier that has two slits in it. The light can diffract through either slit. The resulting wave fronts that come out on the far side of the barrier then interfere with each other. And if we put a screen up here on the right side, we could imagine imaging this and seeing bright spots and dark spots and bright spots and dark spots and then fainter bright spots and so forth. The pattern can be controlled by changing the geometry of this setup. So for instance, if I increase the separation between the slits and wait a few moments for the light pattern to catch up, we'll notice that as we take more data with the screen on the right, the number of bright fringes has increased. We now see that what was once faint on the outside is much brighter. But nonetheless, we have bright, dark, bright, dark, bright, dark, and so forth. This is a wave behavior. How can we reconcile the particle nature of light and the wave nature of light in a phenomenon like this? Two slit light diffraction. Instead of imagining waves of light coming into a system with two slits in the barrier, let's instead set up a situation where we can fire, say, photons that correspond to green light at a barrier with two slits in it one at a time. If we do this, we imagine sending in one photon. That photon has to go through either the barrier on the left or the barrier on the right. We don't know which barrier it's going to go through, but we can look at the screen on the other side to see where it lands. And slowly one photon at a time as we look at the observing screen on the far side, we see green dots. The green dots indicate where the photon that we fired ultimately wound up on the screen. One photon at a time, we're building up an image on the far side of the screen. Now, this is rather tedious. We'd like to see if a pattern emerges in all of this. So I'm going to speed this up. And then when sufficient information has been received by the viewing screen on the other side, I'll comment on the pattern. Sufficient time has passed that we can begin to comment on the pattern we observe on the detector screen. There are places where photons have clearly clumped after passing through the two slit process. There are places where we find few or no photons on the detecting screen. For instance, those darker regions flank the bright region in the middle. This is akin to the interference pattern that we saw when we were thinking about light as a wave traveling through this system and interfering with itself. Now single photon by single photon, we're building up a similar intensity pattern on the screen on the far side. There are bright bands, dark bands, bright bands, dark bands, and so forth. The same alternating pattern of high intensity and low intensity that we saw from the wave behavior. Indeed, it seems that the wave behavior is recovered in the limit of a large number of photons passing through the system. This reconciles the wave and particle behavior aspects of light in a single experiment. And in fact, this famous Young's two slit experiment is one of the many ways that one can reconcile and understand these dual aspects of the existence of the phenomenon we call light. In fact, what seems to be true for the single photon experiment is that we're unable to predict with certainty where any single photon will wind up striking the screen on the other side. But the probability that a photon will strike in the middle is much higher than the probability that it will strike just to the right or just to the left of center. And from that, we can begin to build an understanding that the probability of where a photon goes on the screen seems to be somehow related to the intensity, the amplitude squared of the light wave description of nature. Now in this lecture, let's review what we have learned. We've learned about the nature of x-rays, and we've seen a little bit about how to produce them by experimenting with cathode rays, electron, smashing into a target. We then looked at the scattering of x-rays by matter and following Arthur Compton's explanation of his scattering experiments have come to understand something about the nature of radiation with very short wavelengths. From this, we've seen the implications not only for the nature of electromagnetic radiation as having both particle-like and wave-like aspects under different conditions, but something about the conditions themselves that trigger these different aspects of the behavior to be observed. When the wavelength of the radiation is much smaller than the scale of the thing that it's scattering off of, then we see the particle-like aspects of light's behavior emerge. When the wavelength is much greater than the size of the thing off of which the radiation is scattering, then we see the wave-like aspects of the radiation emerge. And in between, there's a transition, a place where we lack a theory so far to actually understand how to calculate. These are the foundations for what will happen next as we depart the comfortable world of radiation with its wave-like behavior and now it's newly understood particle-like behavior and turn our eye from radiation to matter itself.


Now I've made a lot of chicken wings before, but I've never made them like this. Check it out. We're going to use baking powder. Now what that does is help dry them out and make them extra crispy. Next step, throw them in our air fryer. 400 degrees, we're going to set it for 20 minutes. While our wings are cooking, let's make our sauce. Start out by melting a stick of butter. Now you need a couple big scoops of some minced garlic. Last step, you need the dandos cheesely. Get it mixed around. So it's been 30 minutes and we got our crispy wings. Check it out. Add your crispy wings to your sauce and give them a toss. All right, it's time for the moment of truth. Look at that. Yes, siry Bob. That's a dandome like chicken wing. Yum, yum, get you some.


All of Kyrie Irving just spoke to the media after his 34 point night, let's listen in. Kyrie, I know you have an appreciation for every opportunity you have to step out on the floor. But given your history growing up watching the Nets, how special are Nets' NICS matchups to you?  Whether the NICS were a continental airlines arena or New Jersey was at MSG, now that Brooklyn versus New York, kind of the whole entire area, a lot of people. I see on Instagram and Twitter, on media outlets, just New York, New York versus this whole big thing. But I think as players, we feel it naturally. But obviously being from here, it's a little bit of a different sentiment because I got to go home and actually be around NICS and Nets fans, it's my family. So it's basketball, it's competition, it's a world sport. So it's just nothing but respect.  They've been playing well this season, so well coached team and just appreciate the opportunity. We're going to get more into the game, but I want to jump ahead to Wednesday real quick. Knowing all that Karris has been through since the trade, I'm not sure you're looking forward to seeing him back out in the court and competing against him. Man, just honored and humbled, obviously, to call him a friend, call him a brother. Wish nothing but maximum health and success, love him. My family loves him. So going back and seeing him is always an honor, like I said. And it's even better to go and compete against him because I know he's going to give us his best. And that's what we want. But obviously what he's been through, just nothing but prayers from me and my family, obviously from the Nets and everyone around the world. We wanted to see him get through what he was dealing with. And I'm happy to see him back out there. I went home straight after the game the other night just to turn on to watch his debut. Because it's just so close. It's just family. So I just want to see him do well. But we're looking forward to going to Indiana and playing against a good team too. Brian Lewis, would you host? Could you take us through that last defensive stand, the play that you made to get the travel on Julius? Yeah, no, I was either going to foul early. But I saw him lining up for a jump shot. I thought I could get a good hand on it. Scott called travel. I thought Julius made a good play afterwards, putting down. I was going to foul him after that just to get him to the free throw line. But yeah, that's how I looked. That's how I went. Christian Winfield with the New York Daily News. Hey, Kari, do you at all feel the energy in Barclays when it's a game like this and there's fans in the arena? And do you at all feed off that energy that you get from the fans?  So getting a chance to go in front of playing in front of fans or anybody that's supporting the game and want to see players playing hard and competing at a high level. And that are respectful to all the players and all the professionals that are out there. That's what I thrive in, is just being able to go out there, prepare the right way, give all the blessings to Allah, to God, whomever you call God, as well. No disrespect to anyone else. But for me, before I go out there, I'm just in a meditative state.  Whether there's fans there or not, same thing for me. I enjoy the game the same way, because when no one was there watching me work out or watching other guys work out, we had to find some type of motivation. But when the fans are in the building, it definitely adds a little bit more of an emotional atmosphere. And as players, we naturally feel it. So just try to thrive on whether people are there or not, stay motivated. Alex Shiffer with the Athletic. Hey, Kyrie, you guys had the double-digit lead in the fourth quarter at the next start, the trip away. What do you think allowed them to get back in the game? Well, I think it adds on to Christian's question in terms of the fans getting into it and just staying motivated. We were obviously up double digits. We felt like we had the game closed out, but they kept coming. The momentum shifted, flow of the game shifted as well. They started getting to the free throw line, got into the bonus. We played the second, third, and fourth quarter, I think, in the bonus pretty early. So whenever the game gets mucked up like that, you got to make some defensive holes. But I feel like they just kept coming at us. They just kept coming at us. And that's why it went the way it went, just this prolonged ending to a game where we feel like we should have closed them out early on in the fourth quarter and then been on cruise control. But you got to give credit when credit is due, they kept coming.


Ghargay, Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering from WIT, Solarpur. Topic for today's session is relative velocity and learning outcome of this session. At the end of this session, learner will be able to determine the relative velocity of moving body with respect to other moving body. Let us see diagrammatically. Here there is a vehicle A moving with a velocity 60 kilometer per hour. On the parallel track vehicle B is there moving with the same velocity 60 kilometer per hour. As the velocity of both the vehicle is same, so after time t they will reach at a same position and the observer in a vehicle A will think that B is not moving or it is at a rest position. Same here observer in a B will think that car A is not moving, it is at a same position. So according to the observer relative velocity of both the car is 0. So here the difference between velocity and the relative velocity is that when we are talking about velocity only in that observer is a stationary and when we are talking about the relative velocity in that observer is also having some velocity. Now in second case, increase the speed of car B, keep it little faster than the car A. So let speed of car A is 60 kilometer per hour and the velocity of car B is 70 kilometer per hour. So after time t, the car B will cover some distance more than the car A. So the observer in car A will think that car B is moving with a very slow speed that is 10 kilometer per hour and the observer in a car B will think that the car A is moving in a reverse direction. So according to B, the velocity of A is minus 10 kilometer per hour and according to A, the velocity of B is 10 kilometer per hour. Now we will discuss the motion on parallel path in opposite direction. Here car A and car B are moving parallely but in opposite direction. Say the velocity of car A is 60 kilometer per hour and velocity of car B is 30 kilometer per hour. When the there is two car will pass each other at the time interval t, they feel that the opposite car is moving very fast. So according to the observer in a car A, the relative velocity of car B is 90 kilometer per hour. Same according to B, the velocity of car A is 90 kilometer per hour. So here there is a addition of two velocity. Now we will discuss now the motion in a plane in any direction but in a one plane. Now we will only consider the direction of velocity and find out the component of velocity in x direction and the y direction. So how we resolve the force? Similar way you resolve the velocity and find out the velocity component in x direction and the y direction. Now we will first find out the velocity of A with respect to B. So first find out the relative velocity component in x direction. In x direction there are two components VAX and VBX. So VAX and VBX both the velocity component are moving in a same direction. So the relative velocity is the subtraction of these two velocity because we have seen the same case in a motion in a parallel track in like direction. In y direction there are two velocity components VAY and VBY. They are exactly acting opposite to each other. So there is the addition of these two components VAY plus VBY. It is the relative velocity component in y direction. So the relative velocity is under root of VRX square plus VRY square. Same way the velocity of B with respect to A is also under root of VRX square plus VRY square but here VRX or VRY value may different. Now you pause the video here think and answer the question. For the calculation of relative velocity of B with respect to A what will be the relative velocity component in x and y direction? So this is your figure. You refer the figure and calculate the relative velocity component in x and y direction. We will see one by one. In option A it is given that VRX is equal to VAX minus VBX. It is a relative velocity of A with respect to B but in question it is asked that we have to find out B with respect to A. So this is not a correct option. So VRX is equal to VBX minus VX. It is a correct option and VRY is equal to VAY plus VBY. So here y components are opposite in direction. So there must be an addition of this component. So this is also correct. So both VRX and VRY shown correct in option B. So B is correct option. We will see third option also. VRX is equal to VAX plus VBX. So this is how we calculate the resultant. When the forces are acting in same direction we generally do the addition. So for the calculation of resultant we follow the calculation as per the option C and vertical components are exactly opposite in direction. So there is a subtraction but it is not a resultant force calculation. Now we will solve one numerical here. In the numerical the two vehicles are moving from the same point at the same time with the velocity VA is given 30 kilometer per hour and VB is given 40 kilometer per hour and inclination with Y direction is given 30 degree and 45 degree. So two vehicles move from same point at the same time as shown in figure, determine the relative velocity of A with respect to B and the distance between them after half an hour. So we will find the solution. So here two velocities are there in any direction. So we know that we have to find out the component of that velocity in X and Y direction and inclination is given 30 degree with vertical. So vertical component will be 30 cos 30 and horizontal component will be 30 sin 30. Similarly find out the horizontal and vertical component for the VB for that angle is given 45 degree with vertical. So vertical component will be 40 cos 45 and horizontal component will be 40 sin 45. Now we will continue with the same figure. We have to determine the relative velocity of A with respect to B. So first calculate relative velocity component in X direction. So see here in X direction there are two velocities VBX and VAX. So here we have to determine velocity of A with respect to B. So VAX minus VBX this will be our formula. So 30 sin 30 minus 40 sin 45 it will give you minus 13.284 kilometer per hour. So it is obviously if you calculate 40 sin 45 it is approximate 28.28 kilometer per hour and if you check the 30 sin 30 it is 15 kilometer per hour. So velocity of B is more as compared to velocity of A. According to B it must be in a reverse direction. So it is minus 13.284 kilometer per hour. Now calculate relative velocity component in Y direction. In Y direction there are two velocities 30 cos 30 and 40 cos 45. They are in exactly opposite direction. So we have to do this addition of this two velocity. It is 54.265 kilometer per hour. Now put VRX and VRY in the formula of relative velocity. It is under root of VRX square plus VRY square similar to resultant formula. Calculate relative velocity of A with respect to B. It will be 55.867 kilometer per hour. Now draw the vector diagram. So VRX is minus 13.284 means it is moving in reverse direction. So in vector diagram we have to show the direction also. And with respect to B vehicle A is moving in opposite direction. So this with the opposite direction with respect to B that is 54.264. So it is vertical component and this is the horizontal component. And the resultant velocity of A is 55.86 kilometer per hour. So this is called as the relative velocity of A with respect to B. Similarly vector diagram of relative velocity of B with respect to A also you can draw here. All the calculation will be same. Only the change will be that. You will get VRX is plus 13.284. So plus 13.4 means in the direction of velocity. So this is the direction of the velocity in x direction. And with respect to A B is moving in opposite direction. So this is the vertical direction of velocity. And as per the vector diagram we join the first point and second point. And from first point to second point will indicate the direction of the relative velocity. So this will be the vector diagram for the relative velocity of B car with respect to A. In the same question there is one more question find the relative distance of vehicle A with respect to B after half an hour. And it is very simple that the distance is equal to velocity into time. So we have calculated the relative velocity that is 55.867 kilometer per hour and time is given half an hour. So you will get the relative distance of A with respect to B is 27.933 kilometer. These are my references. Thank you very much.


Hi everyone, Joe for jazby's casebreaks.com coming out to you with 2020 Panini Spectra football single-pack Random team break number four with four of those $300 preseason football mixer spots being given away It's pretty nice, but first the pack break big. Thanks to Matt Jamie and Revital Thanks to you three for getting in Revital definitely has the odds in this one. Let's see how it plays out Let's do the break first one and a five six times names and teams one two three four five and six One and a five six times for the teams one Two all right, so revile you have all the teams except for the Niners The Titans so let's see what happens in this pack first. All right. There's AJ green on top The die cut is Patrick Mahomes pink 19 out of 20 nice Chris Godman 34 out of 50 Sunday spectacle to color pack Phillip Lindsay Sunday spectacle relic Denver and the last one here is Colin Johnson 49 out of 199 his autograph rookie auto for the Jaguars Now let's see who's gonna win at those spots. Let's take this list again Rerandomize them. There's some new dice. There's the new list and Let's roll and randomize in the specter pack after seven times four and a three seven times its top four after seven good luck one two three four five six and Seven and final time after seven Oh, we see other two names right here. So I think Revital sweeps the spots Jamie and Matt Thanks for giving that a go There it is Revital Congrats Top four you're in Jaspie's case breaks calm. Bye. Bye


Hello everybody, Ian here, welcome back to Thursday Theorist. Today we are talking about different seasons, yeah. This is by far my favorite of the Stephen King novella collections. He's had some great ones, some of them have come close, but this is easily my favorite. It has the body, it has Rita Hayworth in the Shawshank Redemption, it has that pupil, it has the breathing method, which is criminally, criminally underrated, I think. But I'm going to go through each one of these novellas and tell you why I like them, and then I'm going to connect them all to the dark tower, you know how we do around here. So first up we have I think Hope Springs Eternal, which would be Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption. I love this book, and it's one of those books where the movie adaptation is just as good as the book itself, but I do prefer the book, like most readers I prefer the book, but I enjoy the book more, even though experience wise and as far as time spent it's actually, you know, better to consume the movie because it does so well with the book, but the book is so comforting. I don't know what it is about that, and that's one of the things about all the stories in this book, yes, even the last one, there's a comfort to reading these stories that I have never truly understood, because there's a comfort reading earlier Stephen King stories that got lost along the way, and that comfort is the stuff that's missing from stories like, you know, a cell and from a view of gate and dream catcher. There is no comfort, there is no feeling that you're being told a story by an wise and aged storyteller, or just a good friend. It's one or the other with King, really. So Rita Hairwood and the Shawshank Redemption, of course, the story of Andy Dufresne, who is framed for killing his wife, and I guess not really framed, he just takes the fall for it, and he meets Red in the prison. Of course, in the title, the Shawshank Redemption, Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption, we're going to be talking about Shawshank Prison, which connects all of this stuff. Now, going on to the body, the body is a, oh, hang on here, no, App Pupil, I'm sorry, Summer of Corruption. App Pupil, I am shocked that App Pupil was not held off to the side and made into a Bachman book. It is probably the most Bachman story that ever bled over into the Stephen King world. Yeah, I know they're the same author, but there's a certain tone and feeling to the Bachman books, and App Pupil has that tone. I love it. I even love the Ian McKellen, not Brad Dorf, what's the name of the kid that's an App Pupil down there in the doobly-doo? I ain't seen anything from him. I don't even, he may even be dead, I don't know. But leave his name down there in the doobly-doo so people know who I'm talking about. But I enjoyed the darkness of it. I've always been a fan of Stephen King when he gets extremely dark, and he did in this one. Of course, one of my favorite Stephen King novels of all time is Pet Sematary, and that's probably the darkest novel I've ever read. Next we have Fall for Miniscence. We have, and if you guys don't know what I'm getting at, this Hope Springs, Eternal Spring, Summer of Corruption, Summer, Fall for Miniscence, Fall, you know, it's different seasons, and then A Winter's Tale, The Breathing Method. Fall from Innocence, well, sorry, the body is, of course, about four friends who go out to try to find a dead body after, you know, one of them sees Vern, his name's Vern. He overhears his brother and one of his brother's hood friends talking about finding the body. It is a terrific story. The movie is terrific also, but the fun fact about the movie, the movie version is Castle Rock, Oregon, and the book is Castle Rock, Maine, of course.  I love the body. There's really nothing bad I can say about the story. Like I said, the movie's great, but moving on, I want to tie these first three in together. Castle, well, they're all mentioned, they're all connected by Shawshank Penitentiary. Shawshank Penitentiary is noted in each and every one of those stories, and the body happens in Castle Rock. Now that ties together a whole load of stuff. So, and you tie Castle Rock in with the Dark Tower with Gwendi's button box because Randall Flag or somebody named RF is in Gwendi's button box. So you bring all that together. But then at the end, we have, I got a trash truck in the background. Sorry about that, I can't do anything about it. Then at the end, you have the breathing method. Now, the breathing method is special because of a quote. There's the quote for you. I opened my mouth and the question that came out was, are there many more runes upstairs? Oh yes, sir, he said. His eyes never leaving mine. A great many. A man could become lost. In fact, men have become lost. Sometimes it seems to me that they go on for miles. Dooms and corridors and entrances and exits? His eyebrows went up slightly. Oh yes, entrances and exits. Okay, so what I thought was a trash truck is actually logging people outside across from me cutting down trees. So it's going to be going on all day. I apologize if you can't hear me over the noise in the background. But I'm going to go ahead and finish this up with the beep beep beeps and everything. So I tied together the breathing method there at the end. Did I go to the dark tower because doors and entrances and exits? So is the club in the breathing method, well my theory anyways and a lot of people's theories because if you go onto the connections forums, you'll see this also, is that the club is on some level of the tower. Anyways, if I missed anything, let me know down there in the comments below. But until next time, I have been E, you have been U. This has been another Thursday theories video. I'll talk to you guys later. Bye bye.


Hi, it's Bridget. Welcome to Above Life Channel. The purpose here is to inspire your spirit and to fill you with hope. Today we're going to channel Maya Angelou, and the reason why we're going to channel her, I have channeled her before, by the way, you can check that out, is because I want some inspiration. I have been really connecting to poetry and books lately and I I really find that that helps give a voice to some of the things I'm feeling in my body and some of the processing that's happening at a deeper level energetically and physically and so I think work like what Maya Angelou has left for us as her legacy gives us the opportunity for the embodiment and the support for us as spirits living in a body. So we're going to bring her in. Thank you. She says thank you. Thank you. Yeah, the still we rise, the rise, the peace about the rising, the rising that's coming up a lot for me. Today has been very poignant. I've had a full circle moment for myself and my life and recognizing that here, let's fix this. Recognizing that kind of how far you've come is something that really is sure as something, isn't it? It sure is. I thought it would be wonderful to speak to you and have some insight about life, some advice. And she says right away, she's saying it is most often, most certainly, not as bad as you think. She's telling me that. Most often and most certainly, it is not as bad as you think. She says the mind plays tricks. It is a trickster. It will bring you to places that are the lowest of the low when there is no need to go there. There is no need and you will find that you have wasted your time in the worry of the things that did not need nor require your attention in the slightest bit. Okay, did you all get that? Let's take a breath. My angel is speaking some words of wisdom. She says your poor heart. Yes, I know. It is so easy to get drawn into the well of self-pity of the swirling emotions that will swallow you whole. And she says it will not tickle you from the inside out. It will quite certainly torment you. She says there is a sweetness to life as it is being lived that you can't come by if you are not there to live it. The understanding that is gained from the experiences brings you wisdom. That at some point in your life if you are so lucky you may and will impart upon others. Primarily your job is to be, to give yourself the role of not only observer but of the keeper of the moments that will create your memory. The keeper of the moments that will create your memory. It is harsh to look back on your life and recognize some of the experiences that you have had at the hands of others where you had no power. Quite literally none as a young child not able to be protected, asked to be taken care of yet sacrificed by the whims or radical misgivings of others and to be believed to be believed is to be born again into a new phase of life so that you can look back upon those events that occurred to you in a way that you are protected now as the one who observes. In this way you can heal insurmountable trauma and pain. Your body is held beyond God and transcendent of family moving through you into a structure that words cannot define. A level of transcendence is required to move through that passage into that place of the deep longing of forgiveness. I'm going to get so emotional. The freedom she says to speak, to speak as your tears fall is a privilege but given to the aged where there will be some sense of coherency in what you have to say. You can formulate sentences now aside from the distracted mind state you could be in, reliving the trauma, understanding the new wounds that now will exist in its place are not the respite that you truly desired. It's true what is said that no one is coming to save you but for you to be saved by your own doing to create a new way of life for your life is a gift that all are given but many will choose to not open. Oh, I can't believe that during this lifetime how could you know it is healing, Bridget. Healing is not for the meek, it is for the savages, the warriors, those who relentlessly pursue the heart who want to ensure access to a touch of love in its empowered unconditional form, that format. It's empowered, you know, love in its purest state and form which can only be touched by you inside of you, the dimension that is you, not from the past or but to heal to make to make a new is not possible but to renew is the way, the path to your wholeness. You must acquire sovereignty and to be believed by yourself is the key. The lost child within has never been damaged. She simply has been hidden until it's safe to come out. Is it safe to come out now? Is it? Only you can answer that. Oh, that one just hit me in the gut. I just felt that. Can we just breathe for a second? Then she says, what is success? We're switching gears now. So we just talked about healing and trauma and sovereignty and oh my goodness, healing. So what is success? Is it a drawer full of certificates, trophies, awards, medals? Is it acknowledgement? Is that what success is? What does it mean to you? When you are at the end of your life or you can see down, she's like, I have no idea what this, the winning stretch, like the home, you know, you're heading into home kind of thing, the winning stretch. She calls it the winning stretch, like the last leg of the journey. When you quite know you are there or approaching it, there is the wisdom that comes from that, knowing. It doesn't cause you to live better than you have. It causes you to look backward. And when the now self is looking backward, the now self pulls you back in to hear the place in between the past and the future. When the future is the threshold into the afterworld, the you now is the one that can receive bliss and the ability to wake, to stand, to see, to feel the sun, to hear the birds, and to know that you are love and that the being loved piece. Can you talk about that more, being loved? She says compassion is a, is that the core of being loved and loving yourself? Being loved comes from compassion inside yourself. So much redirection and she's showing me inside, inside, inside. And inside doesn't mean a deep soul journey, okay? It means present moment here now, present moment here now, here now. That's what she's, what will you choose? What you choose now today will begin to, oh, how did she say this? It's like, um, what you choose here now today will begin. Yeah, there's this energy she keeps saying like renew, renew, renew, renewal, renewal, renewal, renew, renew, a new again, new again, like beginnings, new beginnings kind of thing. That it's like this feeling she's giving me is you always are, you're always doing something new. You're always starting new because you're not the same person you were an hour ago or yesterday or five years ago or 25 years ago, whatever that is, you're different. And with that comes this opportunity to recommit to life itself. It's how she's presenting. There's this really sort of beautiful simplification of life as we know it. And it's, and it goes back to the thing about being present, right? That's kind of how it feels. But it's not quite, it's not like she's kicking in the pants. She's giving this just very beautiful perspective of understanding. Oh, now she wants to, we're going to talk about grief. To grieve what might have been or what has been lost. It's human. It's human. Don't build a house of grief through boundaries or restrictions to protect yourself that is misguided. You don't have to listen to this myself. It is times in grief where your heart is most open, where you are the closest to love because you recognize what has been, what has been. And it's really not the loss of it. It's the awareness after the fact of what it was. Love is not perfect. It is, it has many flaws and sharp edges. She says, it is, has, she says love is flawed and has sharp edges. It is difficult to hold because it's not meant to be stagnant held in one place. It's meant to be moving. It's meant to be in motion, to be, to create a momentum that love creates, a momentum that fuels all these other parts of your life is what she's saying. When there is love, there literally is anything is possible. And she says, there's always love. That's the thing. There's always love. But the experience of it and the awareness of having had it creates this, she says like the separation that, in that separation is what grief is. Grief is the separation or the distance from. And it's a, it's not linear. It's very like this, like kind of orbital kind of moving thing grief. And she says grief is a state of awareness. And at times it's designed to cocoon you so that because your heart feels so vulnerable in the incredible intense awareness of love that love has been. And with grief comes the need for forgiveness for all the things that are not spoken or said for the incredible intensity of the feelings and emotions that you've had. And it's the distance or the grief that allows you the perspective. She says there is hope. Love isn't always like this. Wrapped in pain. The contrast does exist. It's intentional. And then she's like, but is it once enough? Like, I'm like, yeah, I think once enough. And yet we lose people that we love through separation, through a move, through, you know, geography, through human expiration, through death, or through life cycle, or she's switching into courage, courage is having the wherewithal to enter into a place with a new where you will share yourself again, you will reveal yourself again. It's a big ask. She said something along the lines of not being attached to the outcome. It's really not about courage isn't really about the end result. It's about the ability to step in, the ability to say yes, the ability to try again, the ability to do it, to be willing to have experiences without the guarantee of outcome, but to be willing to take that risk. That's what courage is, to be willing to take the risk, the risk to be hurt, the risk to be feel pain, the risk to enter into a grief process again. I mean, all of those things so profound. Oh, so profound. This is pretty deep, Maya. Well, of course it is. What did you expect? Perspective. Perspective. I personally don't think I can hold this much more here like this, so I'm going to have to wrap this up. I feel grateful and appreciative for you showing up today. I feel very deep in this medicine that you are sharing with us, Maya Angelou from Afterlife, and I think it will affect other people as well deeply, deeply, deeply reflective. Thank you for being here. Thank you above-life channel viewers for being here. I hope that we have inspired your spirit, filled you with hope, and encouraged you to live your life. It's yours. It's yours, and you get to live it.