Good morning Doug. Hello, how's it going? It's going well. It's nice and warm on the West Coast. That's always good. Hold on a sec here. Gotta get myself organized. Hey Eric. Yo Tommy. Hi Tamer. Hi Doug, how are you? Good. And Ginger? Ginger, you there? I am. Can you hear me? Yes I can. Cool. You're in Texas right? Unfortunately. I was gonna say how are you doing with the weather and stuff? Now it's fine but the storm was intense. I don't even know how to describe it. I was lucky in the fact that I did have power the whole time. I lost water though on day three. So I was out of water for eight days and had one broken pipe but thankfully it was in the garage and so it flooded the garage a little bit but it was on the floor so it didn't mess anything up. Now I'm just super anxious about every sound I hear in the house and I check the meter four times a day. Yeah because leaky water can cause massive damage. It's amazing but yeah that's scary. Yeah so just trying to recover at this bigger point in time. All right Remy are you there? Yeah. Hi. Hello and how? Yep. Okay and Klaus? Yes. All right Kristoff. Hi. Hello. Let's see we have a fairly short agenda today. So if you have any topics go ahead and add it to the list. Every time you say that Doug it ends up going longer and longer. I know I just jinxed it and I am not eating breakfast yet so I am definitely not in the mood for a very long meeting today. Hey Jim. Morning. And Vlad. Good morning everybody. I was going to slide some Clemens joke in there but I figure maybe I should end this for being recorded. Do it. I'm going to jinx it. It's not recorded so you can put it there. Yeah aren't there? I'm being recorded by automatically hold on a minute. Yep upper left. Yes see I don't see that when I'm sharing the screen. I don't get to raise my hand and I don't see whether I'm being recorded or not so interesting. I think all the C and C have calls by default or being recorded. Yeah that's what I thought. Okay. I didn't think you had any control over that actually. Well technically I do have the host code so I could probably get in there and do something but I never log in with that so yeah. All right Lou are you there? Yes. Hi. Hey and there was someone else on the fly by oh Jesse. All right give him one more minute then we get started. Hamid are you there? I'm here. Excellent. And Simon are you there? Yes. Excellent. All right tell me what it's three after. Let's go ahead and get started. Only 16 people today. That's interesting. All right. Okay community time. Anything from the community people want to bring up? All right so just a reminder we do have an SDK call after this meeting. I'll double check but I'm pretty sure we actually have nothing on the agenda. Let's just do a quick scan there. Yeah nothing. So if you have a topic if you have a topic please go ahead and add to the agenda. Interop discussion last week. The only thing I think worth mentioning because I think most people were too busy to do a whole lot of work on their stuff. We are planning on doing a interop testing starting at the end of March with the hope of maybe being done by KubeCon and maybe do some sort of demo there we'll see how it plays out. But the big thing to know about that is we are planning and doing interop testing starting end of March so that people plenty of time to to bring about their coding efforts. Okay Tim or anything you want to mention from the workflow stuff. Since last time we completed the GRPC stuff we completed the expression language JQ and we're planning our version 06 release before KubeCon EU so just you know working around that to make sure everything is the way we want. That's that cool. All right any. I didn't want to remind you about the KubeCon bash. Yeah I was going to touch on that next. Yeah that's good. I appreciate you reminding me though I didn't forget. Okay any questions about workflow. All right moving on then. So I got a note from the KubeCon EU organizers saying that they're going to have a cloud native bug bash which is well you can read it here right it's talking about basically working on debugging code and banging on stuff and things like that. Now obviously that won't really apply for our spec work however if the SDK folks want to sign up for that just let me know. I'll send in a form for you guys or I'll send you guys a point to the form or whatever is necessary to make that happen. In fact I'll try to remember to mention that then our SDK call if we do have one today. I just wanted to bring that up and if someone wants to join in you know let me know but I didn't think it applied to us from a spec perspective unless someone could think of an aspect that I'm not thinking of. Okay I think there's no more comments on that. I'll try to remember to bring that up in the SDK call. Oh okay it's in where it says there's a bug bash slack channel in CNCF if you're interested in joining that. Okay all right so I have a question and this is more of a get slash get hub type question because I wasn't quite sure how to work here and I don't feel like I'm an expert on get to know for sure what the answer is here. But we got a PR for 1.0 for 1.01 basically just a typo type thing nothing big so that's not the issue. However they open the PR against the V101 branch so obviously I could merge that PR and that would work just fine however that's actually going to obviously change the 1.01 version of the spec at least from a branch perspective. Now I think you can technically have branches and tags have the same name but I think when you when you don't go out of your way to be clearly clear about which one you're actually talking about I think it defaults to the branch and you could only have one I'm sorry in get hub when you have the default thingy it's a default branch it's not a default tag so when someone first goes to the repo they're going to look at a particular branch and we're going to point them to the 1.01 branch which means they're going to see this PR this merged PR as part of that. Now obviously it's not a huge deal because it's just syntactical type things but it seems a little bit wrong from a process perspective that we don't sort of stack up these PRs and then eventually create a 1.02 right it seems weird that we're slipping this thing out of 1.01 because it seems to me once we actually cut a release that thing should be basically set in stone and static okay so I wasn't quite sure what people do in this type of situation I was thinking what they might do is something what I'm suggesting down here which is a create something like a V10 stream branch where that's where all the PRs are sent to and then we just create tags off of that or tags or branches off of that so we'll create a 1.01 branch or something but that way all PRs can go to a stream and we and then we just create the next patch release from that stream how do other people do this kind of stuff is anybody have any suggestions because I wasn't sure how to move forward here can I raise my hand yeah please go ahead um so I'm just I just want to mention the the xml 1.05 edition errata um meaning I think it's okay if you don't make any substantial changes and if you just just uh make um uh type if you fix typos that we're we're looking at the 101 branch since it is one is it a tag or is branch is it it's a branch right it is a branch correct yeah so that's that the one 101 branch is the 101 branch with errata we should merge we should merge the PR into both faces but um I think I think everything that is we want to type it to be fixed we want to type it to be fixed in the thing that people see I think that's that's what we so so you do errata for spec if you're finding embarrassing stuff that doesn't change the spec per se but that is just dumb stuff like typos or grammatic errors or something like this but the the spec with errata is still the same spec that's my that's my stance on that so you lost me there for a second because at some point in the beginning of what you said there you said you merge the PR into both places what is both um so so I think I think the the 101 is set in stone in that we don't really progress on it that's what I mean but but if there are there is something that is helping better for better understanding with 101 um where you are fixing an obvious errata then I think that's fair to put that into the 101 branch but it will also it will also have to exist a master yeah yeah I definitely agree with updating master and and I guess I just wasn't I just felt uncomfortable making a change the 101 branch um because like I said I think typically in my mind it's set in stone but then if we do that when would we ever create a 102 because typically patch releases are always just supposed to be typos type stuff right so when would we ever create a 102 yeah we have we have the question is how do we deal with errata right that's the question and and I think with if you if there's literally just a typo I don't have a problem with it because ultimately what there are still more people who don't know about cloud events than they who know about cloud events and we want them they will show up and we want on the default that we're showing them we want them to to see the right document I think that's the principle that I'm playing and and so therefore whether that document has been you know finalized four weeks ago and or um we we fixed the bug the text bug yesterday I yeah that might be a process objection here but I think I think that the product that the people who are coming to us see is the most important important one and we want them to be normatively correct reflecting what we've agreed to but then at the same time we also don't want to have embarrassing mistakes there right so so one option is to do what you're saying and I think which is basically merge everything into 101 and we basically in my opinion probably never create a 102 the other option is we could change the default branch on the repo to be the 10 stream branch yeah yeah okay so what do people think about clement suggestion basically merge it straight into 101 and what 101 becomes a bit of a moving target but it's always going to be just typo type fixes seems to me the question is whether you're actually changing the standard by fixing a typo and it seems fairly clear that the answer you know right this is more yeah as Clements said this is more a process and puristic perspective right is 101 technically set in stone or not and we're I think Clements is saying no it's not but we are limiting it to just patch fixes and I'm okay with that as long as the group is okay with that but it is it is a you know being a little bit wiggly about things anybody have any objection to that okay tell you what because we don't have everybody on the call here what I'll probably do is send out a note suggesting that and if we don't get any objections then we'll go ahead and do it um well yeah so Jennifer said it's not being wiggly as long as you're making part of the spec yeah well it's it's wiggly in the sense that I think most people assume that once you stamp something is complete you know as it was an official release title or tag it's it's set in stone at that point right and that that's the part that's wiggly to me is we're not keeping it set in stone we're at worst we're morphing it slightly over time so when you look at 101 a month ago versus a month from now I think most people would expect them to be the exact same and we're saying they're not going to be and that's okay as long as we're upfront about it I think that this is like a standard kind of thing is what I'm I'm kind of getting to like all kinds of specs um we'll have the like deal with this uh and in general my experience has been like uh it like typos fixing the typos that's just considered like part of the process and not considered uh versioning up the the spec it's not a change in the spec it's not it's not actually being wiggly but as long as that's like the agreed process is the key part yeah um yeah okay yeah it's funny our life would be so much easier if github had the ability to point to a tag instead of a branch that's the default thing when you go when you come into the repo so such as life okay so there's an ai for me to do that all right any other comments or whatever on that topic before we move on all right cool and thank you Clemens for the idea all right um jim were there any updates on your signature extension proposal I don't think there were but I just want to double check no there aren't um I failed in my attempt to um do the homework that was set to be my by Clemens last week uh don't get my homework I'm afraid okay that's fine um let's see Slinky is not on the call and let me just double check I'm pretty sure this one is still under development with comments and stuff that and therefore it's premature to think about merging let's double check yeah there's still some outstanding stuff yeah so okay I think we need to hold off a little more so just a nagging reminder for everybody please go ahead and review his pr when you get a chance um I think it'd be nice if we can get at least the rough draft of that in fairly soon just to get out of the pr stage and that will I think raise its visibility for people okay um now this one another slinky one now Clemens you said you were having a fit of uh old age and could not remember why you wanted to make a change on this one right um thank you thank you Doug it's yes um yeah I um so so I I know that I don't want to move it um but I'm sorry this I'm sorry I think I'm getting confused no never mind never mind I'm pauses keep going I'm sorry yeah one yeah that is yeah exactly um I have I literally have to go back to our recordings and and see what I said there but I haven't done that yet I have I have the last two weeks were um all of my cloud events time budget is being sucked up by uh working with cause and and his friends okay therefore um I have not had the time to go and take a look at that in detail this one yeah this is the one I was actually thinking of I apologize I was getting them confused I thought something was missing here yeah so yeah that one I looked over and uh like I literally couldn't remember why why I had an objection but then I read it again and that I did today and um that now that looks fine to me I don't know I don't know what I had maybe I had a bad day or something okay but we we had discussed something about this and I'm not sure whether it might just have been that I had no time to look at it and you said because nobody else here knows anything about it that I should go do a review that's probably more like it um but I can we can merge yeah okay well let's make sure Slinky's still not here and he's not okay um well he needs to do a rebase anyway so we'll I'll I'll I'll reach out to him and ask him to do a rebase and see if he remembers what you were thinking of um maybe that will jog your memory but if not we can then merge it however I do need to ask the question of the group does anybody else have any possible concerns with this meaning if everybody's okay with it I'll do an offline double check with Slinky and do a merge unless someone has an objection anybody have any comments concerns okay so let me do that where is it so okay that's this one okay cool and so that was that one this one distributed tracing what was the who were we waiting on you Clemens for this one just to I think we were right yes so that's why I was that's why I was a confused it confused her yes we were waiting on me um and then I have to go go back to because I don't know what so I am opposed to removing it but Slinky had removed some had raised some points and I had said something about this and then there was some homework that was assigned to me I believe based on this but I have to go back into the recording because I can't remember what that was yeah okay yep okay cool in that case I'm moving forward I don't see Lance on the call so I can't nag him and in your scheme registry you saw some I think PR changes to make there right yeah I have I have a few I have a few things to to change there still with the with these with these events I'm not completely completely done with that yet okay so I'm hoping I'm hoping that I can have have that all finalized in probably not next week but the week after okay cool thank you and just to remind you you still have these two up here yeah and and so and yeah the potential properties part that is um that's pretty essential also for the other one we need we need to take it we need to take more of a stance for these for all of those for the triple of new specs we need to take more of a stance in terms of what the author story will be because those are proper apis and not just the the message and we're we're already like we're having discussions with the calls team and our team about um you know how the relationship works between those two big big platforms and most time is being spent on rules and permissions and people and authorizations so you can already tell that that's a complicated story so I think I think we need to go and materialize that somehow in the specs because otherwise we can't get get into off working yeah okay cool um and that's it for the agenda um are there other topics you want to bring up very very short today no one has anything okay then just a quick reminder unless Eric you want to talk about this we do have Eric's issue out here that we said we're going to talk about offline I'm not sure anybody had a chance to do anything with it um but please go look at that and comment if you're so inclined and with that I will go ahead and do the last of the roll call so Manuel are you still there yes excellent uh Priyanka Priyanka you there yeah yeah there we go gotcha okay did I miss anybody for the agenda I think I got all 20 people 21 someone just joined Matt you there yep excellent you just made it because we're just about to adjourn all right anybody else for the agenda or the attendee list all right last chance any topic for either the primary call or the stk call otherwise we'll call it a day for stk as well so check all right in that case we are done really early thank you all for joining we'll talk again next week fabulous yeah enjoy your wonderful leadership again wonderful yes yes I get to go eat breakfast now yes or I start going by now yeah that's why you so rushed okay exactly food is very important you know it all right have a good one everybody


The work I've been doing has usually been done in collaboration with a bunch of people, the most, the major ones are listed there. So my plan is the following, I'll start with neutrinos trophies that won't take very long for reasons which you should understand. I get into then the astronomical counterparts of ice cream neutrinos, ice cream is the largest neutrinos detector in the world. And then I get to the, I guess the part which you are more interested in, the synergy with the very energy of species, of course, and the role of CTA. But as Roberta said, I work at ESO, and as you all know, the CTA South will be managed by ESO. This is where it's supposed to be. This is in the circle there. It's close to Cerro Paranal, where four Van Laaf telescopes are located. And also close to Cerro Masonics, where the extreme telescope, which is going to be the largest optical near different telescope in the world, is going to be. So it's here. It's on this plateau. This is a picture I took last time I was in Paranal on the road, going back up to the VLT. So this is where CTA, so there is a strong link already between ESO and the CTA. Just to make sure we are on the same wavelength, actually on the same frequency, I should say. I wrote here the classical notation I'm going to be using, EV, GV, terranetron volt, betanetron volt, and so forth. So I know you're familiar with it, but just to be on the safe side. So neutrinos, I guess most astronomers are not familiar with neutrinos, so I'll have a slide dedicated to those. First of all, neutrinos are Italian. The name neutrino was coined in Rome, actually by Varga Maldi last century. This is a picture of the famous ragazzi in the Pannisperna, the Pannisperna boys, where actually, you know, physics, there was a very important group doing top physics in Rome. The name was that popularized by Fermi, and it simply means the little neutral one, to be distinguished from the neutron, which was the big one. So it's tiny, that's why it's neutrino, because it's small. The latest upper limit was released last week, I think a couple of weeks ago, it's 0.8 electron volts. So that's about 640,000 times smaller than the mass of the electron, and I remind you what the value is that. So it's really, really, really small. It's neutral. It's a very weakly interacting elementary particle, and it comes in three types. The electron, the moon, and the tau neutrino, which to make our life complicated, they actually can switch between one flavor, as they're called, and the other. And the most important thing is that neutrinos are actually absolutely everywhere. When I give my public talks, people are shocked by this, but it's true. Every cubic centimeter of the universe contains about 340 cosmic neutrinos, with energy which is really, really small. This comes from the big bang, when everything was in equilibrium with neutrinos as well. We probably never be able to detect them, but they are there. And then every second, every square centimeter of our skin is crossed by about 10 to the 11 solar neutrinos, which means that every second we are crossed by 10 to the 14 neutrinos, with an energy slightly less than 1 megaethron volts. So they are really absolutely everywhere. So they could be the second most common particle in the universe, apart from that matter, but I still don't know what that matter is. Just to give a flavor, again, this comes from one of my public talks, but I think it gives you a nice idea. If I shoot one of these solar neutrinos in a pipe, this is the Los Angeles aqueduct. If I shoot a neutrino in the pipe, how long is it going to take for the neutrino to stop on average? The answer is 500 parsecs. This shows you how very little neutrinos interact with matter.  So these are really, really weak interacting particles. So a neutrino astronomy, as I said, is going to take very, very little because until recently we only knew two neutrino sources in the universe. The first one is the sun. This is a paper from the Boraxino collaboration, which highlights the classical fusion reaction which happens in the sun constantly. Four protons merge in a very complicated way. They become an atom of helium. They produce energy, of course, which is what astronomers love, but they also produce two protons and two electron neutrinos. And the energy of this neutrino, which comes to the so-called PP channel, as you can see here, it is about half of an electron volt. The second and last until recently, source was supernova itself. I was still a graduate student when a supernova, the closest supernova to Earth since many, many centuries, exploded in the night imaginary cloud. A few hours before the optical photons, three different unit vectors on Earth detected a bunch of neutrinos with energies between 20 to 40 mega-electron volts. How they are produced is the so-called reverse beta decay. In the core collapse, protons and electrons are squashed to death, and they produce a neutron and an electron neutrino, so totally different physics than the solar neutrinos. Enter ice cubes. Ice cube, in 2013, published the first paper on science saying that it detected a bunch of astrophysical neutrinos above 30-terra-electron volts. So this is already a million times higher than the energy of the supernova neutrinos. All these ice cubes, ice cubes, as I said, is the largest detector in the world. It's the South Pole. You don't see it because it's under the ice. It was built over seven summers by using boiling hot water to dig all these tunnels which were used to lower the detectors of ice cube, which go down to about 2,500 meters. They reach the bedrock underneath the ice. So what ice cube does, it doesn't actually see the neutrinos. It sees the interactions of particles produced by the interaction of neutrinos with the protons in the ice, which produce moons, which produce cherry cove blue light, a bit like a CTA will detect, and it detects this light thanks to these optical modules. So based on the way these modules flash, the ice cube physicists test the interaction and the energy of the neutrinos. This is one more recent result. This is now 2019. The level of detection has reached now 6.5 sigma, which I remind you for physicists is really great that this 5 sigma detection, which is really, really hard to get, but now there are 6.5 sigma. They are sure they detect these 2-physical neutrinos. And as of now, above this range of about 50 teritron volt, we are actually, we know that we are almost sure that the neutrinos are 2-physical because there are also some astro-atmospheric neutrinos produced by cosmic rays in the atmosphere. About this value, we can say that the ice cube has detected about a couple of hundred of astrophysical neutrinos. So now do we know that we've gone from 2-physical sources to 200, unfortunately not. And the reason is this is short gear. The error circles of these neutrinos is huge. These events come in two flavors, the showers, which actually can radiate up to 10, 15 degrees and trucks, which are actually better determined. These are the small circles here with areas of say, with radius about up to 1.5 degrees. So it's very hard to understand to know where they're coming from. But if you look at the distribution in galactic coordinates, you see that this is the galactic plane. They are all over the place. So they are not coming from the galaxy. Indeed, the majority of these neutrinos is coming from other galaxies. And this is a zoom in of the first association we shall discuss in a few minutes. So we know that they're coming from other galaxies. And another hint we can use to understand where they're coming from is the energies. As I said earlier, nuclear fusion produces neutrinos up to 1 in EV. Supernova explosion, reverse beta decay up to 10, 20 mega electron volts. The neutrinos seen by ice cube now reach 6-peta electron volts. That's a billion times higher than the neutrinos from the supernova explosion. So where are these coming from? We know it's due to protons, high energy protons, colliding with protons, or with photons, producing pions, which decay, produce muons, and also neutrinos. The same reaction produces pi zeros up here, which produces gamma rays. And the energy and the flux of the gamma rays and the neutrinos are the same within a factor of 2. So this is a very important point. All neutrinos sources have to be gamma-ray sources. Intristically, I say because the gamma rays could be absorbed. But intrinsically, they have to be gamma-ray sources. Of course, the opposite is not true. You can have gamma-ray sources producing different ways which are not in the source. But if you have neutrinos, you have to have high energy protons. You have to have gamma-rays. And this is one of the hints we've been using to try to make a way and understand what are the astronomical counterparts. So let's get to the first logical association. This goes back to September 2017. So now, four and a half years ago, Ice Cube releases, I mean, now and then, a surplus where they alert the community to interest in neutrinos and they give the position and the other circle. In this case, this happened as I said, September 2017. The energy was quite high, almost 300 teratomores. And what happened was that at the same time, firmly and magic, detected a counterpart which was a blazer flaring in the gamma rays. I'll tell you what the blazers are in a second. These are the light curves. You see the firmly gamma ray light curve closer to the event of the antenna, which is this red line. The source is starting to be in albos, also in the radio and in alabans. So how likely is it that you actually connect such a neutrino with a flaring blazer? So the calculation was done in the science paper by Ice Cube and all the many collaborations which were actually part of the paper. And the result was that based on various arguments, the p-value was between 3 and 3.5 sigma. This is post trial, of course, physicists use post trial values, which means that astronomers, they're starting to do it, but we normally don't do it. If you do 20 tests, you get by chance a two sigma result because one of the 20 is 0.05. So when you do many, many tests, your p-value has to multiply by the number of tests to correct for that. So this is corrective for that and already still it is 3 to 3.5 sigma. But there is more. The Ice Cube collaboration went back to the archive and they realized that it was a flare of neutrinos, about 30 neutrinos coming from the same region over 110 days at the end of October 2014. The energy range was, again, very high, 13th electron volt, 3.6th electron volt. And again, the p-value post trial of the coincidence was 3.5 sigma. So there were two sort of independent events. One was one neutrino and the other one was about 13 neutrinos, all coming from the same source. The source was very anonymous at the time. Now it's become very popular. It's Texas 0506, but 056. Texas means that it comes from the Texas survey, which is a radio catalogue. That's all it means. It was done with a telescope in Texas. This is an optical spectrum. As you can see, there is no much. If you screw the teleuric absorptions and interstellar bands, there are three tiny, very weak lines, which I zoomed in here. Oxygen 2, oxygen 3, and nitrogen 2. Based on this, the p-value that managed to get the redshift, which is 0.3365. The equivalent width, which in astronomy, we defined as the ratio between the line flux and the continual flux, was very, very small. 0.05 to 0.17 octotruses. For astronomers, this is really, really weak. So if I hadn't seen, I've seen only one line, I wouldn't trust the redshift, but they found three. So I'm very, very confident about the redshift, which is vital. If you want to do the physics, because then with the physics, you can do the powers, and you can actually model the sources. This is a point I get to in a minute when I talk about our own work. So this source was a blazer. What is a blazer? So I give you the big picture. We know about two trillion galaxies in the universe, more or less. We believe that most of them, the big ones, have black holes at the center. But in many cases, the black holes are absolutely nothing, like in our galaxy. Our galaxy, the black hole is dormant, is sitting there. There is no gas falling to it. Yeah, you can see it by other means, but it's really doing nothing. In about 10% of the cases, the nucleus at the center, you can see this is Nc41-51, becomes active. We call them active galactic nuclei or AGM. Why? Because much of what the black hole pulled in by the potential of the black hole, converts its gravitational energy into radiation, and a lot of power is emitted. In about, let's say, 10% of the cases, jets are developed. These are streams of particles moving close to the speed of light. When these jets are pointed towards us, and this is the famous picture that Roberto was referring to, which is now about 27 years old next month, and when the jet point towards us, we call the source a blazer. And by that, I mean within 10, 15 degrees. Due to the math, there's about one galaxy out of 100,000. It's a very, very rare class, but they are very, very powerful. So they are actually dominating some parts of the sky, including the radio and also the gamma ray, and the very energy gamma ray, the CTA, is going to be something. Why are bases important? Because they are, of course, sites of very energy phenomena. Again, this is very limited to the CTA. So far, we reach with detected photons up to 20 to 30 volts from them, and the speed of the jets reaches 0.9998C. That's the launch factor of 50. How do we know that? We know because we studied them in the radio, and we see these blocks moving with time. We know the distance. We can infer how fast they are moving. Turns out they are moving faster than light, which doesn't make any sense. It's a selection effect because the source is running after its own photons. Time is compressed. If you do the math properly and you put in the orientation angle, you can actually infer from the superluminal motion as we called it, the real motion, and it turns out to be up to launch factor of 50. So nothing is violating special activity here. There is also, as I said, based on this, we know that there is relativistic beaming, which means jets moving very fast. It has more land going with the line of sight. And thanks to this, there is amplification. And so the jets in place look much, much more brighter than they are because of this boosting, which turns out that it's produced by relativistic beaming. And it goes like over factor to some power. And this is very well known. My definition is that glaciers are nature's free accelerators. And they are very efficient. Free in the sense that it's cheaper to look at the blazer than to be in the larger line of the sun. So you actually can study accelerators by studying blazers, which explains why many physicists actually moved into blazer territories to be able to study these free accelerators. So 2017, as I said, it was four and a half years ago. What happens is then. I'm going to give you a summary because the literature is full of complicated claims. So I've done my own selection, very biased, because I've been working in the field. And I'm going to tell you what happens is then and what we know now about possible other new resources. First of all, there is a 2.9-sigma detection, so almost 3-sigma, from, guess what? A sigma 2. NGC 1068, totally different beast. It's a prototype sigma 2 galaxy, it's obscure. And apparently, although the physicists will say it's not infection, it's a hint. It's a 2.9-sigma. Then there is a 3.3-sigma combined access in the northern sky, which when you look carefully, it's due to four sources. One is, again, 1068, and then there are three blazers. One is our friend, 0506, and then there are two other anonymous blazers, 1424 and 1542. And then there is a 3.0-sigma time-dependent access now in the northern sky, again, due to, again, NGC 1068, again, 0506, another blazer, 1542, the same one there, and the M87, which is, Paolo and Tommy and I call it, almost a blazer, because it's jet, it's a very strong source. It's aligned within 17 degrees with the light of sight, I'd say 1720, so it's almost a blazer. How did the ice could get these values? What they do, they look for clustering of photons. This is a map, a sky map of their many events. They look for clusters and they look for access over the background, the two circles here show you the strongest northern and southern sources. Now, if I go back and highlight the names of the sources, you see blazers over the place. Apart from this 68, you see that there are three blazers here, two blazers here, and then there is a mid-circle, which I said is almost a blazer. So this is where it resides from ice to wind. Then there are other resides from the literature. One comes from our own group, a paper by Paolo Johnmi and myself and others. We found a 3.2 sigma correlation, post-triali game, for 47 gamma-ray blazers. I'll discuss this in a minute, but these were a particular type of blazers. We call them IVS and HPS. What is that? This is based on the frequency of the synchrotron peak. This is a classical blazer LCD. This is BLLAC, the prototype. As you can see, this is frequency, and this is dwarf nu or square DDE for the physicists. There is a first peak, which is due to synchrotron emission, and then there's a synchrotron peak, and another peak, sorry, high range is where, which we don't know what it's due to. And based on the frequency of the peak of the synchrotron emission, we call sources HPL, like Macaulay 501, which has a frequency reaching almost to the 20 when it gets in albus, or intermediate when the peak is about under 14. Why? We are interested mostly in the sources, especially HPL, because as you can see from Macaulay 501, when you shift the synchrotron peak, the whole LCDs get shifted to extremely high energy. So this is very relevant also to CTA. These are the sources the CTA is mostly going to detect. Then there is another result, a 2.9 SIMA correlation excess for the LPI selected NGF. These are sources which show a very strong radio core. The four bias associations again are all blazes, but they appear to be LBIS, so the peak is below under 14 hertz. Another 3.9 SIMA correlation excess for the same AGS sample, but for a different S2 sample, and then there is a 2.9 SIMA association in 5.9 SIMA by Antares, which is a northern detector in the military and sea, and an ice cube event, and they both appear to be linked to another blaze. So let me a few words about the John Newton site. What we did, we looked, we dissected and we set the regions around about 70 ice cube events. These are, this is their projection in Equatorial Coordinates. We only looked at the tracks. These are the ones which the most position is best determined, and in blue are the sources which included the red ones and in the galactic plane, which gets confusing, so we dropped them. This shows you how complicated this is. This is one of the good ones. This is one of the good Neutrino error ellipses, okay? So the size here is about slightly more than one degree. All these red dots are radio sources or the blue dots are X-ray sources. And there are, you know, hundreds of them inside. If you only look at the radio and the X-rays, you move to the right of the plot, and the numbers go down immensely. We're looking for non-thermal sources. Non-thermal sources emit in the radio, the X-rays, and also the gamma rays. So this is what we did. We looked for radio, X-ray, and gamma-ray sources within these individuals, and we got a bunch of associations, okay? We got about 47 of them. And the interesting part is that we did it for two class of erasers. We did it for the LBS. So, signal on peak, less than 10, 14 hertz. And then we did the, we did a match. We counted how many erasers we found with these 70 error ellipses. And then we, Paolo Giormi did an amazing work. He took a random number of regions in the sky and looked for the same type of sources, and he got the same numbers. You can see in the neutrino error region, we got 15, in the control sample, we got 14. In the year 17, year 20, 24, 26. But when you look at the IPL and HPL, so signal on peak above the 14 hertz, we got an excess. In the neutrino error region, we got more sources, significantly more, 3.2 sigma than in the control sample. Don't worry about the values numbers here. The point is that high school publishes a 90% error circle. But we know that there are systematic, so what we did, we increased this error circle by 1.1, 1.3, 1.5 to be sure that we are missing sources. Anyway, the bottom line is that we find an excess of about 15 gamma ray blazers on top of the background at the 3.2 sigma level. And some of them are like excesses of 506 in ways which I'll explain in a minute. So again, summarizing in these other results, not include with ice cube, you see blazers all over the place. Okay, other IPL and HPL like in our case or MDS, but blazers appear to come out as possible counter parts. Unfortunately, as you can see, it's still 2.9, 3.2, 3, we're still there. So physicists, again, are saying these are hints, they're not detections. So what is the take home messages? We're missing the magical five sigma, unfortunately, we have a bunch of three sigma associations. Blazers are all over the place. The rest are hints that only blazers are very rare. And rare blazers are classes are actually involved. And this comes most from our group. As I said, IPL or an HPL, so blazers, when the signal peak is above 10 to 14 parts, which actually makes sense because us and the ice cube group put an upper limit on the signal that they can explain, and the blazers can actually explain in terms of ice cube events. And it's about up to 15, 30%. So blazers, yes, are popping up all the time, but they cannot be explained all of the ice cube signal. There is something else going on there. So what are we doing now? I get to CTA in a minute. So we have 47 sources, which are detected possibly connected with neutrinos, about 15 of them should be detected. And so we started a project where actually, I work at ESO, my work was over energy, where ESO and the Grand Decar in this case have made ice cube. Why? Why? Because only thanks to optical telescope, this is our BLTs, a set of parallel, and this is the Grand Telescope of Analyst. Only by getting over the spectrum and getting reships, you can get the powers, you can actually get the physics of the sources, and you can understand what's going on. So most of the sources, selected by John Lethal, did have reships. So we started the project to actually get reships of the sources, published a bunch of papers, paper one, led by Simona Payano and her group, published a bunch of spectrum of the sources. And the good news is, for all the sources we looked at, this is the table for our paper, we either got reships with very good significance or lower limits. So we can actually tell you either the reships or a lower limit to the reships, which means we get the power of the source, gamma ray, neutrinos, whatever, or a lower limit to the power. So based on this, we actually launched in another paper, which appeared online last December, where we actually characterized all the sources, trying to look for features which were distinguished them from other blazers. And the answer at the moment is that they seem to be quite similar to other blazers, apart from one thing, which has to do with, again, our Texas 0506, which most of the sources are masquerading BLX and introduce what I mean in one second. So after the detection in 2017, the big question in the time was, why of the 5,000 blazers we know has ice cube possibly detected only this one? And so we and others started to understand if the source was special. And indeed it was, at least from our point of view, published a paper one year later, where we actually show that despite appearances, this source was not the BLX. What do I mean? I mean this, blazers come in two flavors, BLX on the left with optical spectra, which as you see from the original discovery spectrum of the source, they have nothing, they have very little lines or very weak emission lines. And then there are the flat spectrum blazers, which are crazy. So they have strong lines, like the first one we can discover, then the zealotry of these galaxies, very, very strong emission to HIFI and beta lines. According to me in power, John, there are fortunately, well, fortunately two types of BLX. There are the real BLX, where the lines are intrinsically weak. So the equivalent width, which is again the ratio between the line flux and the continuum is small, because the line flux is very weak. This BLX sits in so-called low-excitation galaxies, which are very inefficient accretions. This pitch accounts for mechamaland best. Then on the left, you see the standard view of AGM. You see the black hole, the accretion disk, clouds moving very fast close to the black hole and show this plane broad lines, some dusty material, for me it's like a torus, a jet. This is what with the AGM we know enough. On the right, you see these low-excitation things. We think there is something else going on. They don't have a standard Sakuya-Sunaya disk, that is called a version-dominated accretion flow, and there are no broad lines. So we believe the real BLX sits in low-excitation galaxies. Then there are the fake BLX, which we call mass-cremium BLX. This source is intrinsically at the spectrum, which is like a plasma, a fast-pattern equation. But the jet is so strong that the equivalent width, which is again the ratio between the line flux and the continuum is small because the denominator in this case is very large. So these are intrinsically fast-pattern equations, but the lines are strong. And the way this can happen is shown here. And by the way, so, and we show the text of the hypothesis is a mass-cremium BLX. So it's actually, it's a fast-pattern equation, but the lines are very weak because the jet is very, very strong. And this is why this happened. It can be shown in this simulation. It goes back to an old paper of mine, led by an exit of mine in Mineland. This shows you an elliptical galaxy, standard elliptical, on top of which we put a jet, a non-thermal jet. And this numbers here give you the ratio between the jet and the galaxy at 5,500 ohms. As you can see, already when the jet is three times higher or 10 times higher, the features are gone. By the time you are 15, 20, your features are gone. The same thing is happening here. We have a fast-pattern equation, very, very strong jet, which is washing out all the lines. And then that's why it's called a mass-cremium BLX. Many of the BLX in Palo Giormi's paper and others papers are masquerading. Why it is interesting, but the theories love this because remember how you get neutrinos in the saucer, you have protons mashing against other protons or photons. If you have a masquerading BLX on top of the photons in the jet, you have also the photons in the disk. So this in theory should be more efficient neutrino emitters. And we found more. And remember that this past 1424 and 1542, they were popping up in this list from ice cream all the time. There's a paper which appeared on an archive two weeks ago. We studied them and again, they are also masquerading. Okay, 1424, UPCs 1542, 1025s. So far, all three of the blazers which ice cream are indicated as possible in the emitters are masquerading. So this we think is meaning something. Okay, you don't work on neutrinos. So at this point, you are asking yourself, why should I care? But you should, especially UCCI people, you should because neutrinos are actually giving us a window where with them we are exploding an energy range which is and will always be inaccessible with photons at any range. Which means basically that neutrinos are giving us a new window on very high energy surfaces. Why is that? Because of the very famous EBL, extra-active background light. As you can see from here, you have a photon coming from a distant blazer. It interacts with this UV optical infrared photons which make up the extra-active background light. This is the sum of the emission from all the galaxy in the universe and it gets attenuated, photon-photon collision.  If you are distant, you are detonated a lot. But if you are of high energies, you are totally attenuated. And the cross-section is maximum. When the target of the energy goes like one over E gamma, E gamma is the energy of the gamma ray photon. So if you have a 100 TV gamma ray photon, of course, one which could be seen by CTA, it would interact with the photons in the infrared background will be completely destroyed. And this is a nice picture from one of the ice cube papers which shows you the photon horizon as a function of energy. So here we have tera-electron volt, peter-electron volt, x-electron volt. And as you can see, by the time you reach the tera-electron volt or more, you basically are bound to very, very small distances. One, you are at the peter-electron volt, you're basically bound to the galaxy. So the only way to study this high energy phenomena is through neutrinos. Conmic rays, as you can see them appear, they are related as well. So neutrinos are relevant for this mystery as well, but as conmic rays, they are not conmic rays at all. They are particles where this gamma by Victor has. Last century, by flying a balloon to very, very high altitudes they are the most energetic things we know in the universe. This is a plot where they are fluxes as a function of energy.  They reach into the exa-electron volt regime which is a thousand peter-electron volt. And the record load is actually 320 exa-electron volt. So these are particles, they are charged. They are nuclei of atoms or protons. And by studying the neutrinos in the Tesla 0506 source, now we know that we've seen that there's to be protons in the jet of the source in this region. So for the first time, you might associate some cosmic rays with an astronomical source in this region, not down here, unfortunately, but this year. So we are in the era, as we all know, of multi-messages for physics. So you have a jet which is shooting towards us and it shoots cosmic rays which are charged, unfortunately, so they are deflected by magnetic fields. And so they reach Earth coming from all different directions. So it's very, it's impossible to know where they're coming from or very hard, at least. You have the photons which above a certain energy they are totally absorbed, then the neutrinos. The neutrinos managed to come straight to us, unimpeded with the energy in the head. And so this is the only way it had energies to make sense for the sources. So what are the open issues? And then I get to the synergies. As I said, we still don't have a smoking gun, although I'm totally convinced that blazers have to do with the neutrinos from Ice Cube. Blazers have to be involved, as I said, but other classes actually should be as well. Another patient issue is that we still don't know after ingrate, so 30 or more years, what is produced in the gamma-ray emissions in blazers. And still we don't know, we don't have any hard evidence of energy problems in the sources. Why?  This is Makayla Foto-Wam, an ACD put together by Paolo Giorni. You see a very strong exibarabilia and you see a very high barabilia also in the very high energy ban. We still don't know which processes are produced in these photos. There are two options. One is to do with synchrotron radiation. As I said, in blazers, we know that the low energy, you have electrons moving in magnetic field, moving very fast, producing synchrotron radiation. The same electrons are pushing the photos they produce to very high energy through the so-called inverse component emission. These are called the tonic models because electrons are electrons. And then the other scenario, which again, I've shown you already, is proton-proton collision, proton-proton collision. In this case, the gammas come from the K of pi zeroes and these are called a tonic models. In this case, you have to have an interval. Why can't we know? The reason is that because you can fit the energy SCD of blazers with the two different models, equally well. These are SCDs. The data are these points in red here. They're different states, quiescent, half layer, soft layer. They are done in different ways. On the left, you have not the tonic models. On the right, you have proton synchrotron models. And this is for a blazer parcel of pi 15 zero two. And you can fit equally well with the two different scenarios what data actually you can see. And this is for one of your papers to take preparation, which shows again, inverse condom on the right. So let tonic scenario, which can explain the current data, which are the red points. And on the left, you have an adrenic scenario, which can explain equally well, the current data, which are the black points. So at present for this source, we cannot say, is it adrenic or is it a tonic? The red squares of course are CTA simulations. And there you can see that if it's adrenic, we have the CTA points. If it's electronic, we have the CTA points. And so there, given the high energy range, is more narrow, but there we'll be able to nail, absolutely the scenario behind the energy emission in blazers. And more will stand, why CTA 11 for blazers? Other reasons of course. At the moment, 89% of all extracurricular sources detected at TV are blazers for which I said earlier, because blazers are very good, high energy emitters. But the way these things have been detected is very, very strange and not very representative. What happens is that this magic has very, very strange things. So they look at the blazer only when they are in outburst. So there is a telegram saying that it's an outburst in the octagon, in the X-ray in blazer. Then they point the telescopes to the source and they see them in outburst. This gives us a very biased and patchy view of high energy emission in blazers. CTA will give us a systematic approach and the take times more blazers than we can do right now. And we apologize on me a couple of years ago, no, sorry, a few years ago, we actually did this. We simulated what CTA should be able to see based on our own model of blazers. And we know we publish tables and numbers and based on the type of survey, we know that CTA is going to see many, many blazers and give us throw light on high energy emission from these sources. I'm done, 48 minutes. So what are the points you need to take home? Number one, we are witnessing the birth of extra galactic and dinosaur. So it's a very special time until recently we only knew two, the dinosaurs in the universe, the sun and the supernova. Now we have many potential ones, but we still don't know what they are. There are various design associations, largely with blazers, we need by Sigma or more. We are working hard to test the blazer case because we know that the blazers have to be, well, we know. We think, we feel blazers are actually involved and we're doing using, you know, optical spectra with Israel and Antarctica. The other message to bring home is that we have a new window, a unique window of very high energies of physics and energy which will be forever accessible with photons. And then CTA actually is going to be invaluable to finally prove, disprove the existence of high energy protons. So I don't need processing blazers and also give us an unbiased view of their TV properties. And with this, I'm done. Thank you very much.


And we are back. We are watching the 1976 World Series now. Moving on up as we go. Just another reminder for everyone, not baseball historians. This game, this game happened 13 years before I was born. Around 23 years, maybe 26 years before I started actively caring about baseball. We just like baseball. Yeah, so not historians. We know some of the names more in this one because the Yankees are in here. We had these are these are my father's Yankees. And sadly, 16 year old, my dad was 16 years old at the time. Probably heartbroken because the big red machine just steamrolled everyone. Sweep a couple of fun facts about this World Series, Jim. Yes, this game we're about to watch was the first weekend World Series game that started in the evening. Nice, because they didn't have lights Sunday night night game. So that's pretty exciting. Some had lights. Some didn't really have lights to like 88 like last week. So that was kind of fun. So like crime time, sit around the house. Sunday night. This was the like the first Sunday Night World Series game. That's cool. So that's kind of cool. It was freezing. Reds could have made it a bit more of a game. It started 40. Well, this was a good game. Yeah, we're watching game two because it's the closest to game one, three and four, the Reds just beat them. The commissioner out of spite, it dropped to 30 degrees, but he didn't wear a jacket just to like show that like it's not called. Manly. Better times. Remember when Arietta used to do that? Um, and what else? Oh, the Yankees, the previous two seasons had been playing in Shea Stadium. So this was the first year that Yankee Stadium was back. That's cool. And the first World Series with a DH. Oh, or they did the DH every game. I think they did it rotating games. Someone will correct me on that. But it's something significant with the DH. Yes. And again.  If you expect us, a lot of people, I'm going to stop reading the commentaries because a lot of people are getting mad. We're learning. If you see an old person commenting, how didn't you know Louis, Louis Rainier say, I don't know, wasn't born for another decade and a half. One guy told me to read books and I want to flaunt all the books I read. Read a book. Big book. Read a book, dude. Play the game. Willie Randolph. Willie Randolph. Oh, Jake. As always, watching baseball is brought to you by our store at Johnboymedia, shop.Johnboymedia.com. And we just put out a whole new line of baseball is fun shirts. And here's one. Here's one. Here's another. Here's another. And there's a whole bunch of different styles. We have podcasts, YouTube shirts. So go get a baseball.  And now now let's watch. This is the seventh inning. The Yankees are down three one. I believe they make a little comeback to make it close. Game two got the Southpaw. Fred Norman on the bump Yankees. Yankees beat the Royals in a close series. Reds steamrolled their way to the World Series. They're like a machine. Yeah. So what do we got? Ooh, that was a nice one. Uncle Charlie coming out. I like that one. I like that one. Sorry, Willie. Willie Randolph, one of the most beloved Yankees people in history. His hair over his ear looked different than the hair and the rest of the hair. I think that batting sense. Oh, that wasn't a looper. That was a line drive. To be honest, I couldn't see the ball. Yeah, I didn't see it until the guy caught it. Until the guy caught it on a bounce. I have no idea. That camera angle of Willie hitting it was good. Yeah, you can't see the pitch. Couldn't see the pitch. Couldn't see where it went. That's such a... Fred Stanley walking up and doing just the generic bat over the head stretch. You got to do that stretch. Guys need to do that more. Yeah, put the bat in between your back and do this one. Just pivot. Just swivel. Normals, oh, fake bun. Fred. Okay, Fred Norman. I love how many fake bun stands to do back in the day. Or like, I'm thinking about it. Swimming in your head. It's in my arsenal. Fred Stanley, a pretty bad hit. I think his OPS was like 600 this year. We went through the Yankees lineup, or I did very briefly. And I recognized almost every name besides Fred Stanley. I mean, he was batting last and picking it at short, and that was pretty much it. Still the same split screen that we were using in 1972. And this is pretty fun because Willie Randolph, what they're saying right now, Willie's fast, Fred Stanley can't hit, so it's a little game of hitting mouth. Are we going to bun? Is Willie just going to steal? And we're playing on concrete here still, right? Yes. Like this is the first of AstroTurf. It's concrete with carpet on top of it. Yeah. He rose just getting all those infield hits. Something about the way the first basements leaning over is making me laugh. It looks gassed.  Like it's not even, it's gassed and bored. Yeah. Like this doesn't matter. Really? The way he put his glove up. Everything's like not too excited to be there. Strikes a sand land inside corn. It was a good baseball game. Everyone's choked up on the bat all the time in 70s baseball. By the way, incredible catchers in this series. Johnny Bench, Thurman Munson. That'll be out of play. It's a good foul ball call. Yeah. Got to let him know. Pitcher, Greg Norman. Fred Norman. Fred Norman. So Greg Norman's the golfer. We got a battle of friends. Fred Stanley versus Fred Norman, which is throwing me off. There's a lot of you don't see enough friends. Norman pitched a lot of games for them in the season like 34. Right. Storm and Norman. Nice little career. You're 76. 33 starts. Inside. Good take. Three and two full count. So you're sending will be right. Yeah, you got to send him. No, it's cool. How scared of how scared were they of benches on? I mean, they should be scared.  But I think Willie Randall's also got speed. But they don't believe in Stanley. They don't believe in Stanley at all. Well, all right. So you got to think that Stanley's probably going to try and make contact. Yeah, put it on the concrete. Yeah, you got to do like a hit and run here. Put on the concrete. There he goes. Oh, beautiful. Yo, oh, look at Willie flying. Yeah, love the jog zone. And that's huge. That's your nine hole hitter hit and run. So for anyone who doesn't understand why I love baseball so much or the beauty and the intricacy sport because that count went to three and two that happened. Yeah. That doesn't happen on a two and two count. You don't put a hit and run in motion. But once it gets to three and two, it's actually the Yankees formalize a plan and it worked perfectly. A lot of times it's not going to work perfectly, but that was awesome. And know what the other thing I was thinking during that, which again, my one liner Yankees are. No, they have the same amount of hits now. A lot of handshakes. I'm wondering if the pitcher had a good pickoff move because again, think about how much that ties into what just happened. I mean, that was a perfect time for a pickoff. But like, is that why Willie didn't leave earlier? Was it the sphere of Johnny Bench? I mean, there's so many moving Barts and we're back to the top of the lineup. Love a good hit and run. Showed he got a big old butt. Mickey Rivers. Yeah. Mickey Rivers still shows up at old timers day for the Yankees every year and he's like 80 years old now he still flies in the outfield runs faster than me. Oh, yes. We're talking about the pitcher. Yeah. So I said, he's no Don Goh. Don Goh was the guy who started Game 1. Now that looks like a blooper. Okay. Mickey. A lot of outfielders were coming in low back then. Just lobbing it in. Was it just like if you didn't, if you weren't an infielder outfield, you just. I think he was having fun. This is my dad's favorite Yankee Roy White. Roy White. This could have been when Roy White won over your dad's heart. I mean, he was 16 watching this at home Sunday with his dad probably. I maybe yeah. Yeah. This is transcendent. I don't know if I use that right. Double barrel action in the bullpen synchronized throwing. Yeah. Look how cold everyone is man. They're freezing. They're wearing like by the end of the game. They said it was 30 out winter coats. Cincinnati. So who's coming up next? Thurman. Roy White. No, no, no. Roy White's up. Roy White's up. Who's on deck? First base is open. So they're deciding months. They're deciding right now like, hey, I mean, you're not pitching around. No, you're going after. Yeah, you have to. You have to attack him pretty heavily here. Lou Pinella in the hole, by the way. Sweet Lou. All inside. Take by Roy White. Yeah. Gotta come after him though. Take third Stanley. No, don't do it. Don't do it, Stanley. He's so happy. He hit a double. Not doing anything out there. He's right in there. But Roy's got to work the count. Had to see one first. Yeah, gotta see. Because if you can get on first for Thurman. Good. Look at the hard cut out by a second. It's like the turf. Good speed on Roy White. Looks like he's standing so far away from the plate. That's a nice pitch. Ooh, I would have given it to him. He wanted it. I'm gonna have to check with Pops on that one. I mean, it's a really good pitch considering how far away from the plate Roy White is standing. That's in there. He's like, he's kind of standing like a rookie of the year when the kid goes to the bat. And he's just like as far away from the plate. Let's see what he's got to lean into it, right? No.  Tiny. Yeah. I'd throw that outside breaking ball day of how far away he's staying away from the plate. You would throw your left-handed outside breaking ball all day. Yeah. Without a doubt. There's video of you throwing lefty. Yeah. Well, if I was Norman, right? If you were Norman talking about if I'm the plan, it would have been wild. If you were out there, talk about transcendent would have been great for the Yankees. Look at that hard cut out on the turf. Gets a slider. Ooh. Wow. They held up. Who's got the cannon in left field on these reds? Here's something people will get mad at me about. Who's announcing this game? I like him so much. I can find out, but it's got to be a name we recognize. They rotated like every game. Oh, okay. Yeah. But he's, it must have been such a fight between the different networks and stuff. He's like, I doubt if he can score. That was George Foster in left field with the cannon on the hard hit ball. Sparky coming out. So cold. Wearing a batting glove as gloves. That's fine. Yeah, that's good. And out of the pin, I think it's Jack Billingham. Jack Bill. Jack Bill. Bouncing ball up the middle. Okay. Whoa. Interesting.  Once you see he's down, right? Why? Once you see he's down, throw it a first. Chambliss got down the line a little better than I thought because it looked what they're saying that hesitation, there was a chance they couldn't get the runner at first there. Okay. You don't see the camera in those things, but you think it seems like he might have been able to go for Joe Morgan. If not, you're still getting that guy. Oh, Glova. We're still getting that guy who's on the ground in the middle. I mean, maybe like, you don't know doesn't really hurt them. They win the World Series. Jesus. Tough inning for Joe Morgan. Good save. Got it though. I'm with the emphatic call, but the Yankees tied it up there. And that is important because Reds were up three nothing and they won game one of the series. So, and look at that.  That's always something when your two teams look at each other like whoa.  But yeah, I mean, Cincinnati's No, no, when you see that scoreboard, you go, whoa, is a good one. We're locked up, huh? Locked up after eight.  They're at home. They're about to go up two games to none. And now New York has tied it up. But the big decision here, and this is what we were looking at, and I'll start playing this. This is now we're skipping to the bottom of the ninth inning. I'm interested to see if the broadcasters talk about it. Because Catfish Hunter has how many complete games? He finished 21 games that year. He had 21 complete games. He is the Yankees' best pitcher. Ace free agent came over from the A's. He's pitching a decent game, nine hits, but three runs, whatever. They're in it. They leave him in. Now they have Sparky. Sparky Lyle. And the Yankees have Sparky. He pitched in game one, two innings, but he was their best reliever. They traded for some relievers. Their career. The Yankees traded away two relievers for Grant Jackson, who was poor in the ALCS. And it's Catfish's game. I want to see if the announcers talk about it. Yeah. Our old friend Concepcion. We've watched so much Dave Concepcion. We've seen him grow up. That's why they didn't take that guy out. That was kind of an easy play, but good job by the announcers. Yeah, the announcer hyped that up pretty good. Ninth inning in the World Series. I might be able to. Yeah, that's true. That's true. Let me see if I can find it. The announcer for you. So this is game two, right? Yeah. Catfish is talking with medals. So games one and two was Joe Garagola and Marty Breneman. I'll be very honest with you on those. Don't ring a bell. Breneman's a big name. I think Garagola is too. Garagola, I know the name, but like that. So wait, this is Catfish versus Rose. And it's probably Rose's fourth at bat. Taken the whole way. And mad about it. Says it was low. It's kind of looking at him. Sideburns are back a little more. Yeah, almost hiding the whole year. Rose's fourth at bat versus Catfish this game. Ooh, wanted that one. I mean, all my answers are already answered why they didn't take Catfish out. Yeah, you just yell at him. That's called a man. When's the last time we saw Catfish in the 72 World Series? 72 World Series with Oakland. Or was it 74 as well? We might see him twice, but he is a different guy.  All right. So he had two quick outs. Yeah. That's why they left him in, like even if they're going out by out. Right. I think it was his game, but they do have Sparky back there. I wonder if he's even warming up. Probably not. Probably not, yeah. So one out away from going extras here. So Pete Rose. Spoiler doesn't happen. Pete Rose goes 0 for 4 in this game. He had a walk earlier. Here's Griff. He's here. Senior up in the two hole for this game. Hitless so far in the series, which was a game. This is the second game of the seven. Squeezes it. I'm interested in the way Thurman's catching these guys. Yeah. He's catching a lot of them thumb up, which is different. Like it looks like he's getting handcuffed, but that's clearly his style says low puts his glove in the dirt says spike it doesn't spike it. Dude. Oh, no. Holy smokes. This is why we haven't heard too much about Fred Stanley. Oh, yeah. It would have had him. It was a tough play. I don't know if it would have had him, but can't throw it away in the World Series. Can't throw it away.  That's the go ahead run. You just let the get the second Fred get away from the mound, dude. Get out of here. Can you tell me how old Fred Fred is? He looks young. Yeah. He looked young right there. Like I mean, that was Thurman months and Billy Martin catfish Hunter. And then Fred tried to come to the mound after throwing the ball away. You can't go there. Get out of here.  Just go do puppy dog face. And dude, again, think about how baseball writes himself. Fred Stanley had the big hit and run double. Yeah. And for Yankee fans, that's gone in one throw. That's gone. Now they're walking them. Yeah. So they're walking Joe Morgan, who had a crazy year that year. He has the highest OPS on the Reds that year. Yeah. I was looking at Fred Stanley. How old was he? I was looking at Fred Stanley. Yeah. How old was he? 5'10", 165". And 76". It's 28". Or is that the game? Yeah. You look young. They're little baby folks. Looks like a kid there. Yeah. He's also standing next to Munson catfish and Billy Martin. Yeah. Those are some... Alsace. Yeah. Okay. So yeah, they got the pingo. There's two guys. Dick Tidro, sparkly, two best relievers for the Yankees this season. Dick Tid. Finally. Perez. We saw him be a World Series hero against Boston. Runners on first and second. So he got the force everywhere. Two outs. Man, that blows for catfish. Yeah. Just like that. First pitch. Why is the outfielder so deep? I mean... Why was he so deep? So deep. I mean, I know Tony Perez is a hall of fame hitter. But you... You can't let that happen. You can't let exactly what happened happen. Man, that's good for the Reds. How quick did that happen? Yeah. I mean, once that error, two pitches, right? Pitch, error, intentional walk, pitch, lose game. That's brutal, man. And again, so many moving parts on this. This would have made the series 1-1. Going back to Yankee Stadium. I don't think the Yankees had a shot either one.  Look at that error. Yeah. Dude. That changes the box score. See what I was saying? Look how much that changes the box score. Yeah. It's funny. It was 3-9-0, 3-9-0. And that one... Once this error gets put... I can't see my fingers. Once this gets put up here, that changes these. God. Brutal. Terrible. Well, I think this was the last World Series for the Reds. I think they went... This was the end of the Big Red Machine? I think they went... Well, I don't know if it was the end of Big Red Machine. They might have been good and just lost in the LCS. Right. But I think they went... 72 World Series lost. 73 didn't make the playoff. 74... Yeah, we had a couple... 74 they lost in the LCS. 75 World Series wins. 76 World Series wins. A couple other powers are starting to rise in the NL. But yeah, this is back-to-back titles. Yeah. I mean, I don't know when the Big Red Machine officially ended. I'm sure that Reds fans watching will know. I think they're going to say now. But I guess probably not. They just say it runs through the 70s. Yeah. I would guess... Tony Perez... I would guess they were still a threat. I mean, that's an incredible lineup that we just saw. Good players. But I wonder what was the unraveling of it? Like, was it just they all got old together? They were addicted to drugs. Seasons. Let's take a quick look and then we'll end the video. Let's... Yeah. Dive into some Reds histories for everyone. Yanks ended up doing okay as a franchise after that. 70... 90s at least. Okay.  Oh, what the... So they lost the NLCS in 79. Yeah. They didn't make the playoffs in 77 or 78. They lost the NLCS in 79. They got swept. Yeah. And then they didn't make the playoffs again until 90. So I would say... Yeah. And they came in second in 77 or 78. So I think they were still a very good team in the NL. And they came in first in 79. So I think you can... I think, you know, Reds fans can say now... Through the 70s. Through the 70s. Yeah. But the World Series and the playoffs kind of ended there. Yeah. 79, Johnny Bench, Joe Morgan, Concepcion... After this game... Geronimo, Griffey... After this game, they didn't win another World Series game until 1990. Hmm. So 14 years. That's tough. So that might have been the end of the Big Red Machine kind of in a way. Anyway, that was cool. Fred could have stopped it earlier. I mean, he was the only Yankee name I don't know. Stuff for a reason. Should I text my dad and maybe I'll update them later and just say, What are your thoughts on Fred Stanley? Should I call him or should I just text him? What happened on that throw? Can you give him a quick call? I'll allow it. You'll allow it? I'll allow it. I'll give him a quick call to my father and let him know mobile. I think he's going to say stunk. Yeah, we'll see. Oh, oh. I forgot. I have to use my other cell phone. Oh, God. Isn't that wild? No, I have to turn it on so it's over. It's over. Let's see what my dad says.  Whoa! Thanks for watching. That was watching baseball. Well, today's Thursday's episode. We'll do one for Friday and then we'll see how the weekend goes and how busy we are with everything else we're doing. If you're interested in anything else. Name's Fred Stanley. Why'd I say hate Lynn? I don't know. Very confusing. It's not weird. I think I was thinking Freddie Lynn. Whoa. Go check out all our other channels. We've been posting episodes on talking yanks every single day. We've been posting episodes on talking baseball every single day. Every day. We've been posting multiple episodes on John Boy and Jake Radio, YouTube, which count every single day. We've been keeping busy and keeping the content flooded. Check out the shop. Reverse ads. Reverse ads. Thanks guys. See ya. That was watching baseball.


i'm so annoyed i'm so annoyed i'm so pissed off i'm so annoyed are you so pretty yeah i bought my macbook pro hello friends welcome back to a new video this is a very impromptu video that i've just started to do today i've got like no makeup on wow i could still use lori on your face today my laptop died i can't make videos about it so until i get a new laptop i can't make any videos so today is sunday where i would usually be in an editing haze the whole day i was like what am i gonna do today like i i literally could not think of what to do and then i thought i've never done the try a chapter challenge tag whatever you whatever you call it i don't know by the way before we get into this video i do have a ko-fi link down below where you can support me for the cost of buying a coffee i'm gonna be buying my laptop hopefully this week you all will know if i have it if i've got this video up i'm gonna be my parents are gonna be buying it and i'm gonna be paying them back over time because your girl has no money the bitch is broke my ko-fi will be linked down below if you want to help but don't feel obligated at all like you guys have already helped more than i could ever imagined so anyway into the video i'm gonna be trying a chapter of three different books today and then i'll decide which one i'm most excited by and we will read that i have got three very different types of books so the first is The Silent Patient by Alex Michael Ides this is i think this one best thriller at the Goodreads award last year it's about a woman who has killed her husband and then refuses to speak and it's about people trying to get her to speak i assume the next book i picked was A Darker Shed of Magic by V.E. Schwab so Sabine and Yasmin are doing a read-along for this series and i've been meaning to read it for so long like so long it was kind of one that i was thinking about getting around to this month anyway and so i thought i'd put in this video i think there's like multiple londons there's like gray london red london and we're following someone who can travel between them i've got a love hate relationship with V.E. Schwab like vicious was one of my favorite books ever and then vengeful was two stars that's so upsetting so that's a fantasy and then lastly i thought we'd throw in a classic for a bit of a shrink on this is Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day by Winifred Watson it's about a woman who has a really monotonous boring life and then one day she just decides to throw in the tower and live for a day i want to read more books from Persephone books which if you don't know is an independent bookstore in london that publishes out-of-print women's work i think i'm gonna start with a darker shade of magic because that's on top of the pile so i'm gonna read the first chapter of this and then i'll let you know what i thought of it so initial thoughts on a dark shade of magic i did like it i like the first chapter essentially kel our protagonist is one of the few people who can travel between london so you can go from red london to gray london to white london wow it seems that he communicates messages between the londons to the royal families it was a good first chapter it set the scene introduced us to kel i don't believe that the king that he was talking to is gonna play a major role like i think it was more just introduced us to kel and what he does but i am intrigued i'm kind of in the mood for fantasy at the moment next i'm gonna read the first chapter of the silent patient okay so i read the first chapter of this and i really like it honey you've got a big storm coming i really like it and i didn't even i didn't want to pick this because i've been reading so many thrillers lately like i've been on a bit of a thriller binge but so it opens with a diary from is that a malisha yeah um who is the woman who killed her husband she was encouraged by him to start a diary because she was feeling down and like in her head i assume we're gonna come back to the diary as it goes along the way that this was written was very interesting i think it was the therapist or the person who believes that they're gonna be able to get her to speak whose perspective we're reading from it was very intriguing like it was a real page turner and i really like the tone of voice in which it was written in so like i think this now chumps a darker shade of magic if i'm honest with you but also i've read so many thrillers but like i kind of don't want to pick it but it sounds so interesting okay so i was gonna move where i was sitting i was gonna go outside for the final shot but i was comfortable and didn't want to what is wrong with this girl what is wrong with this girl so i just read the first chapter of miss pettigrew lives for a day by winifred watson and like it was fine it was it was fairly in good and fun as classics go there were a few phrases that i don't agree with but it's aged i think she's just got a job to go to uh this like party animals house and be a governess but i don't know if she has kids so i don't know how it's gonna work out anyway i'm not gonna read this the whole time i was thinking there's no point me even reading it because i'm gonna read the silent patient for this video i loved the beginning of this i can't wait to hear what everyone's been talking about you may notice i'm back at my family home my parents home i'm gonna be here for a few days socially distancing because i'm not fully in their their household so we're back with the bookshelves we're back with the cats you want to say hello hi are you so pretty yeah the biggest reason as to why i've come back is because i bought my macbook pro i never thought in my life i would own a macbook pro so i went out and got it yesterday and i'm just so excited to be able to edit videos again and for editing videos not to be of pain because it had gotten like to a point where my laptop was just so slow and it was it was a real struggle if anyone has any videos or tutorials or stuff just to like fully get me into how it works because i've never owned an apple laptop before let me know she's beautiful i haven't added a any kind of background yet thank you so much by the way to everyone who helped me out on my ko-fi page for affording the laptop i can't tell you what a weight it is off my shoulders the amount that you guys have helped me i think it's over 200 pounds i can't tell you what a big relief all the help that you guys have given me on ko-fi is so thank you from the bottom thank you so much if you've helped me out on there it really is amazing i'm so thankful okay i need to stop being soppy back to the book i'm only like 73 pages in so i've barely read anything i just haven't had a lot of time to read for like moving over here and everything i am enjoying it however the major gripe i have with it is that so far it's been all about the psychiatrist or therapist i don't know the right terminology is but the guy is speaking to her it's been all about his life like how he met his wife and why he loves her so much and i'm like why do we need to know this i really don't enjoy the parts about his life and i understand that there will probably be a reason as to why we've learned so much about him i feel like that will end up being a reveal like why we're learning so much about his life but i really don't fucking care i don't care i don't care i don't care it's okay so far but like i don't feel fully into the thriller we've now got another cat here do you want to say hello lexie you don't look very happy i'm not loving this and i don't know if i'm crazy because everyone else loves this i'm still having that issue where to me it seems so centered on the psychotherapist the one who's narrating the story when the concept is so interesting of this woman refusing to speak after she kills her husband there's so much that we could explore with that and we we're kind of not or not to a degree that i want to be i just feel like it's so consumed by the narrator and i tend to read more female thrillers i think like thrillers by women but i do read thrillers by men obviously but this is just so masculine in the way that like the women in the story are all framed through the men in her life like the woman who has killed her husband is so framed by her relationship with the narrator and the relationship with her husband and the relationship with these men in her life it's just annoying me i'm sitting on the floor and i guess i'm not really used to it i'm not really attached to any of the characters like the characters are just so bland to me the writing is okay like it's nothing that i'm obsessed with i'm so fed up of his storyline it's not bad i'm just like i don't need you here you know the the concept of the book is always so interesting and then you've got this bog standard plot line for him i just feel like i've read it before and i'm just not interested oh lord again a fucking game nothing new nothing changed same old shit so this is sad considering it had such a strong start it's not awful it's like a three it's it's gripping in some aspects oh by the way i'm 200 pages in so i only have a small bit left i have about 130 pages left it could pull itself up because i've heard the ending is surprising and polarizing so we'll see surprising and polarizing um do you want to say bye lux i'm pissed off i'm fucking pissed off i'm pissed off i'm pissed off so i didn't like the ending at all you know what i kept thinking i kept reading it and i kept thinking listen they won't sleep that low that won't be the ending that that won't be it that won't be it and then it was i'm so annoyed i'm so annoyed i'm so pissed off i'm so annoyed it's so shit so shit please be something interesting it was fucking obvious the whole time why do people tell me it's had a surprising ending it didn't bullshit bullshit bullshit didn't enjoy it didn't enjoy it didn't i'm just really unhappy with how it ended i'm really unhappy with the direction that the story took i feel like it was utter bullshit why did this win why did you all like this so much i don't feel like it's written that well i don't feel like any of the characters are people you can connect to i feel like there's so much so much of the book is a waste so much of the book is a waste so much of what happens happens for no reason like no like it has no identity like it does not it does not look like it's i'm i was angry i was angry would not recommend i wouldn't recommend it to anyone but i'm giving it two star i'm giving it two stars i'm giving it two stars it feels right in my heart it feels right another thing i just want to say quickly that i forgot to say last night was that i really don't feel like the bipolar disorder representation was good in this it's obviously not something that i can really speak on because bipolar disorder isn't something that i experience however it did make me feel uncomfortable while reading it i just felt like it wasn't a healthy representation to be putting out into the world and like giving people that perception of a person and i i said this before early in the video but i really didn't feel like the female characters had their own identity had their own experiences it was all through the lens of the men in their life so yeah that's just like two more of my issues with it really well the first chapter challenge or whatever it's called was a failure i've been scared good reads winner of the year incorrect incorrect incorrect we're in the turn of the key i'm pretty sure was on there and came like a second i think lock every door was on there both so much better please explain to me why you all liked it because i'm fuming i'm fuming anyway hope you enjoyed the video um i'll see you soon with another one we all know it's coming this weekend i'm so excited my copy arrives tomorrow and it's gonna be so much fun reading midnight sun so i will see you then thank you so much for watching i'll see you at the weekend bye