Capacitors may at first seem daunting with their large numbers of electric charges separated by a spatial displacement. What happens if you have more than one capacitor-like object in a system? Let's begin to learn how to handle situations where more than one physical capacitor system is present. In this brief lecture, I'm going to explain how it is that you begin to handle capacitors when there is more than one capacitor present in a system. To begin with, I have to define what that system is. The system that I'm going to be discussing is a system that we're going to see over and over and over again, one that's very common and commonly represented with a set of well-defined standard symbols. The system is something known as a circuit. Now the heart of a circuit is some device that's capable of generating an electric potential difference. And we're used to thinking about these in common discussions about the world around us. We think of sources of electric potential difference like batteries or like the wall plug outlet which in the United States delivers about 120 volts. So I will start with an archetype and I will simply label it battery. We'll explore batteries real and otherwise in a bit in the course. But I can begin by defining a battery simply as something that delivers stable delta Vs, that is electric potential differences. That's the job of a battery. Whenever you see a battery represented in a circuit diagram, which I'll sketch in a moment, that is a device that delivers a constant, reliable, stable electric potential difference. And as we know from studying electric potential differences, that means that this is a device capable of providing work per unit charge. Now the symbol for a battery looks like this. It has one long line and one short line and then it usually has lines that come off of those at right angles. So this is a standard symbol for a battery and it's very common to label the side of the battery that when it's connected to another device delivers positive electric charges. The movement of positive electric charges will be our reference point for all discussions of circuits going forward. So the long line is labeled with a plus sign. Now let's look at a very oversimplified circuit. A circuit is simply a closed path through which electric charge can be moved, much like water through pipes in a home plumbing system. So let's look at a very simple circuit employing only a battery. So I will draw my battery, I will label the side that emits positive charge. Now these lines that come out the end, these are little bits of conductor. So I have here conductor that extends out of one side of the battery and conductor that extends out of the other side of the battery. Remember that a conductor is a material that allows charge to move freely through its volume or along its surface. Conductors are the heart of circuits. They are the highways that allow charge to move from one place to another under the influence of an electric potential difference. What we're going to do is we're going to simply make the simplest possible circuit by connecting one end of the battery back to the other end of the battery. And I've drawn this here in blue, but again all of this is just conductor. So you can think of the battery with its electric potential difference like a pump. It's capable of moving positive electric charges to a higher electric potential point and then the charges will move through the conductor to get back to the lower electric potential point. So this is very similar to a pump that takes water from a lake up to a hill and then there is an aqueduct or some other device that lets the water run downhill. And then the water at the bottom of the hill can do work by moving a paddle wheel for instance and then it could be allowed to flow back into the lake and then pumped back up again. And if you could make that a perfectly closed system with no losses of water then you would never need to replenish the lake. You could just keep pumping the water up, let it roll down, do some mechanical work on the way, let it coast back into the lake and then pump it back up again. This is what a battery does in a circuit. It's a pump that takes charges and it moves them to high electric potentials and then it allows the charge to move, for instance if you connect one end of the battery to the other like I've done here, it allows the charge to then essentially flow downhill through the conductor and then be pumped back up again. So the flow of positive charges in the circuit, which again will be our reference points, as I've drawn the circuit, will be clockwise. The battery emits positive charge at the top, the conductor then carries the positive charge without any resistance to motion to the other side of the battery and then inside the battery a chemical reaction will pump the charge back up to high potential energy and then let the whole thing repeat. This battery will have an electric potential difference delta V and that is the electric potential difference that allows for charges to be moved around. Okay, that's the simplest possible circuit. It's a closed system, positive charge flows out one end of the battery through the conductor and back into the other end of the battery and the whole process repeats itself.  We'll see why that's bad and we'll explore the consequences of that later, but it's a good thing to know that you should never try to do this in real life. Don't go home and make a simple circuit like this right now by taking some recovered wires from an old electronic device that's just lying around gathering dust and then a 9 volt battery. If you hook a 9 volt battery's positive terminal to its negative terminal and you put what's called load in the circuit that is no thing on which the charges can do work to lose energy you run the risk of blowing the battery up. So we'll explore that in detail later. Let's put a device into our circuit. The next simplest thing that we can put into a circuit is merely a switch. This is a device that either interrupts or completes the circuit. It also has a simple symbol. It has a line like this, conductor coming in, a line that's raised like a drawbridge and then another line going out on the other side. So this looks just like a switch. If you were to push this thing down, if you were to shove this down and close the switch you would then create a perfect line of conductor that's uninterrupted. On the other hand, if you open the switch as it's represented here then you interrupt the conductor and you would prevent the flow of charge. So let's go ahead and draw a very simple circuit with a switch in it. So now I've just repeated the drawing above. Here I have my battery with its electric potential difference delta V and now I've put a switch into the circuit. The switch is open as it's drawn here. I could instead draw the switches closed like this. So very typically, if you want to indicate that the circuit begins in a state where charge cannot flow, you would draw the switch open and that would indicate that at time zero the switch interrupts the flow of any charge through the system. Later on you might redraw this and show the switch closed, in which case now you're indicating that the circuit allows for the movement of charge freely through the conductor without interruption. So those are two very simple devices that one could imagine putting into a circuit. And the next device we're going to put in is a capacitor. Capacitors also have a standard symbol. They have a line of conductor, a plate, a line that represents one of the plates in the capacitor, an equally sized line on the other side representing the other plate and you'll see there's a little gap in between them and then another line of conductor. So this is the standard symbol for a capacitor in a circuit and if we wanted to for instance we could go ahead and draw a very simple circuit right now with just a battery and just a capacitor. So what I'll do is I'll label the battery by its steady electric potential difference that it produces, delta V, and I will label the capacitor by its capacitance, C. Now you'll notice that the symbol looks like a parallel plate capacitor. That is one where you have two plates of equal area separated by a gap with a distance D. The plates have area A and so the capacitance is very easily given as being equal to for instance epsilon naught kappa for the dielectric that might be put into the gap A over D. That's for a parallel plate capacitor. That's a special case. You don't actually have to know whether or not the capacitors that are drawn in a circuit are parallel plate capacitors or not. All that matters is that they have a capacitance C and that every capacitor has a capacitor equation which allows you to relate the charge that's stored on the capacitor to the electric potential difference that is across the capacitor. In that case we just have Q equals Cv where V is the voltage across the capacitor, C is the capacitance, and Q is the charge stored on either plate of the capacitor in terms of magnitude of charge. That's the key feature of every capacitor is that it has one of these equations. So in this very simple circuit we can start doing some explorations of electric potential difference and figure out what the electric potential difference across the capacitor is. Now you might look at this and go, oh well professor it's just the electric potential difference provided by the battery. But let's explore that and make sure that we understand why the in this simple circuit with one capacitor hooked up to one battery the electric potential difference across the capacitor must be that provided by the battery.  I'm going to define one point in the circuit and it really doesn't matter where I choose it but I'm going to pick this corner down here and I'm going to define this to be ground. That is at this point in the circuit the potential is equal to zero by definition. Now why I do this is because I need to measure changes in electric potential through the system and so I have to pick a reference point. When we're dealing with point charges we put the reference point at infinity. When we're dealing with circuits we pick a point in the circuit that we declare to be ground or potential equals zero and we measure all potential changes relative to that point. You choose that first point anywhere you like and then after that what matters is that you measure the electric potential of any other point with reference to the first one. Every delta v needs a vi and a vf so you've got to pick your vi what's your initial point what's your initial potential and I choose this corner. I could have picked anywhere else in the circuit. You can play around with this if you like on your own and see that it doesn't make a difference but you have to make that choice first. Okay great so now what I'm going to do is I'm going to pick another point and I'm going to maybe use purple or something like that magenta in this case to label the other point that I'm going to measure. I'm going to choose just as an initial demonstration of how one does this. A point that happens to be right near the first one that I picked so I'm going to draw a little point to measure as my second potential location. This magenta dot just above the corner where I drew what I'm referring to as ground or zero potential. So in this case what I need to know is what are the changes in electric potential between the red point and the magenta point the corner and the second dot that I drew. So in this case if I label this as point one and this is point zero I would like to know v1 minus v0 that's the first delta v that I'm interested in. Well v0 is by definition zero and what I have to do is look at the circuit and figure out whether or not there are any places in between the two points along any path where there are devices that might potentially have a change in electric potential like a battery or a capacitor or as we'll see later other devices like points of resistance in the circuit which can generate electric potential differences also. We seem to have nothing but pure conductor in between v0 and v1 the points where I'm measuring these voltages. Because along the shortest path here that I'm indicating by moving the dot there are no devices that change the electric potential from ground to point one. I'm left to conclude that this must be zero. Well this is interesting because there's an alternate path in the circuit that I could take to get from ground to point one rather than taking the shortest path I could take a long path one that takes me through the capacitor then back through the battery and then down to point one. So this is the short path answer. What about the long path? Well in a closed system where there's no way that energy can get into or get out of a system like the circuit that I've drawn here any path I take through the electric fields that are present in either the capacitor or in the battery must yield changes in potential that are independent of the path that I travel just like in a point charge electric field just like in a uniform electric field if I go from point A to point B the changes in energy between those two points because the electric force is a conservative force must be the same independent of the path that I take. I could take a short path I could take a long path it doesn't matter. So I must find that going the long way this must still be true otherwise energy would not be conserved in a closed system and I would have free energy on my hands that would actually run out of control and possibly end the cosmos which would be a very bad thing. So conservation of energy gives us a principle by which we can analyze short paths or long paths between one potential measurement point and another potential measurement point in a closed system like a circuit. If I look at the short path there are no things that change the electric potential itself between zero and one and so the changes there must be zero. If I take the long path I have to go through two devices but it must be true that it's still zero which means that the net change in electric potential going from this corner through the capacitor and back through the battery must be zero. So I learned a very interesting thing by this exploration. I learned that the change in the electric potential across the battery must be equal to the change in electric potential across the capacitor such that if I do delta V battery minus delta V capacitor I get no net change in potential zero. So this is how we know for instance by doing a very simple assessment of electric potentials and changes in electric potentials that whatever the voltage provided by the battery in this simple circuit it must also be the voltage that's across the capacitor assuming that the capacitor has had enough time to fully get its maximum charge and set up its electric potential difference. Now what if I have two capacitors in a circuit? So let's imagine this circuit here's my battery here's some conductor I have one capacitor some conductor a second capacitor and then all conductor back to the battery. So here's my change in potential across the battery which I'll just call delta V little b and then I've got delta V c1 delta V c2 and corresponding capacitance is c1 and c2. What's known? Well we know the following we know that whatever c1 and c2 are each of those capacitors has a capacitance equation the charge on capacitor one must be equal to c1 delta V1 and the charge on capacitor two must be equal to c2 delta V2. So we've just learned a very important thing we've learned that every time we look at a problem that involves more than one capacitor the first thing we should write down of course are always the knowns in a problem and the known here is that each of those capacitors has its own relationship between the charge on its plates and the voltage across the plates the voltage change across the plates and those are related through the capacitance this constant that's determined by the geometry of each of the capacitors. I'm not assuming that c1 and c2 are the same capacitance I'm going to assume that these could be very different numbers from one another and proceed. Well what else is known? We know that in a closed system whatever the changes in electric potential they must all add up to zero. So we know that delta VB minus delta Vc1 minus delta Vc2 must be equal to zero this is a closed system or a closed circuit there's no external way for energy to get into or out of the system all the energy that can be provided is provided by the battery and any changes in energy must sum up to zero in a closed path in the system. So what I've just learned is that delta VB must be equal to delta Vc1 plus delta Vc2 and this means that if I pick a path let's say I define ground to be here and I pick another point some place else well I could even just come back to the same point right let's pick a simple path that takes me from ground through the circuit and back to ground if I go this way up through capacitor 2 to the left through capacitor 1 and down through the battery I've experienced all the changes in potential in the system and I come right back to where I started and in this particular case because I've come right back to where I started I know that the net change in energy must be zero and therefore the net change in electric potential must also be zero. So whatever the individual voltages across capacitor 1 and across capacitor 2 they must sum up to whatever is provided by the battery. Another way to look at this would be for instance to do the following. I could make my point of zero potential over here in the right corner and I could measure the electric potential difference over here at this point 1. Now there are two paths that I can take to measure these electric potential differences. I could go clockwise through the battery and then go to point 1 or I could go counterclockwise through the capacitors and go to point 1. What I see is that if I go clockwise I experience one potential change delta VB before I get to point 1. And by conservation of energy whatever changes I go through the capacitors they too must equal delta VB otherwise energy is not conserved in the system. So what I find of course is that while the sum of these voltages must equal delta VB there's no guarantee that the individual voltages themselves are equal to delta VB. They could be very different but their sum must be equal to delta VB and that's embodied in this equation. Okay great so let's go ahead and employ this. Let's make a hypothesis that C1 and C2 can be combined in some way mathematically and yield an equivalent capacitance of a single capacitor. That is the hypothesis is that if I have my battery, one capacitor and a second capacitor that through some mathematics I can re-represent this as my battery and just a single capacitor. So here's C1, here's C2, and here I will call this CEQ or the equivalent capacitance of somehow combining these two capacitors into one with its own single capacitance. That's a hypothesis. We don't know if it's possible yet but we can check. If this were true, if this hypothesis were correct then of course there would be an equivalent charge across this capacitor which is equal to CEQ delta VEQ. Well of course we can immediately see that this picture looks just like the original simple battery and capacitor circuit we drew and we already know what VEQ is going to be equal to. VEQ is just the delta V across the battery. So we have that delta VB is equal to delta VC1 plus delta VC2. We can now substitute in with the capacitance equations for each of the capacitors. So this is delta VEQ and if we now substitute by rewriting this equation we would find that this is equal to Q total over CEQ is equal to Q1 over C1 plus Q2 over C2. All I've done is take the capacitance equation for the hypothesized equivalent capacitor, the original capacitor 1 and the original capacitor 2 and use those to substitute for the delta V's that show up in this equation. So all I do is insert capacitor equations in this step. Now what about these charges? We have three of them to deal with. What are these going to be? We know that at the beginning before the capacitors are charged up. So imagine now I put a switch into the circuit. So here's my battery, here's my switch, here's capacitor 1, here's capacitor 2. At the beginning this is an electrically neutral system. So we start off with the total amount of positive charge. So Q positive plus Q negative is zero. That's a neutral system. Then we close the switch. Now the battery can exert it's electric potential difference on the two capacitors. The battery emits positive charge which builds up over here on this plate. A corresponding negative charge builds up over here on this plate. A corresponding positive charge builds up on this plate and a corresponding negative charge builds up on this plate. The way you can see this is if positive charge goes up the top and piles up on Then the positive charge here attracts the negative charges in this part of the conductor and capacitor system to the left, and the positive charges are attracted down here toward this plate on the bottom, separating the charge in between. If you wait long enough, eventually the net amount of positive charge on this plate, q1 positive plus q1 negative plus q2 positive plus q2 negative, by charge conservation must still equal zero. So if charge is conserved in the system, initially the net amount of positive and negative charge is zero. You add them together, you get zero. At the end, even though you've moved charge around in a closed system, no charges have been created or destroyed. And so you must still have that the positive and negative charge on capacitor one and the positive and negative charge on capacitor two are zero. And because no charge is moving around anymore, it must also be true that this is zero and this is zero. And the only way that all of this can be true is if the following relationship holds that the total positive charge in the system is equal to the positive charge that's built up on the plate, the positive plate on capacitor one is equal to the positive charge that's built up on the corresponding plate on capacitor two. And if the total amount of negative charge in the system is similarly equal to q1 negative and that's equal to q2 negative. Now keeping in mind that in the capacitor equation where you have q equals cv, this is the magnitude of charge on either plate of the capacitor, then for q1, this will just be equal to q1 plus which is equal to q1 minus. And for q2, this will be equal to q2 plus which is equal to q2 minus. And because q1 plus and q2 plus are equal, we find out that q1 equals q2 and that must be equal to the total charge stored on the equivalent capacitor in the circuit. So let's revisit our equation. We had that q total all over the equivalent capacitance is equal to q1 over c1 plus q2 over c2. We found out that this, this and this are all the same number. q total is equal to q1 is equal to q2. So these all cancel off of both sides of the equation. And we're just left with 1 over cEq equals 1 over c1 plus 1 over c2. So we found a relationship. We found a relationship between the equivalent capacitance in this particular circuit where I have battery, capacitor, then another capacitor in sequence back to battery, c1, c2. These are known as series capacitors. That is, they're in sequence and they divide the voltage that is in total across them. They also all have the same charge q on their plates. So if I add another capacitor in here and run through the whole exercise again, what you'll find is that 1 over the new c equivalent is 1 over c1 plus 1 over c2 plus 1 over c3. And if I add a fourth, then you just add plus 1 over c4. If I add a fifth, then you add plus 1 over c5 to this. So in general what I find out is that 1 over the equivalent capacitance for a bunch of series capacitors is the sum from i equals 1 to the total number of series capacitors that are directly in sequence with one another. It's the sum of 1 over their capacitances. And again, this is only for capacitors that are in sequence with one another. They all have the same charge. They all split up the total voltage across them. And this is how you relate their capacitances to an equivalent big capacitor. What about a different arrangement of capacitors? What if instead I have my battery and then I have a branch of conductor in my circuit and I have c1 to the left of c2. Well, I can play the same game. I can define zero potential to be down here in this corner. And then I can measure the electric potential difference with respect to a point one. There are three paths that I can take through this circuit. I could walk this way to point one. I could go this way to point one or I could go this way to point one. So I have path number, let's call this path A, path B, and path C. So what are the electric potential differences from zero to one in path A? Well, the only device that I go through is the battery. So it must be that this is equal to the voltage difference across the battery. What about path B? Well, in this case, I go through capacitor one and then get to point one. So it must be that this is equal to delta V c1. But since delta V10A and delta V10B have to be equal by conservation of energy, then we know that this must be equal to delta VB. What about path C? Well, again, here I take a path that goes through capacitor two and then gets me to point one. So this must just be the voltage change across capacitor two. And again, by conservation of energy, this must be delta VB. So what I find out in this arrangement, which is known as parallel capacitors, that is they're adjacent to each other in the circuit, they all have the same voltage. So what we find is delta V c1 equals delta V c2, unlike in series where they don't necessarily have the same voltages. In parallel, they do. And in this simple circuit, for the case that I've drawn here, this happens to be equal to delta VB. You might get a more complex circuit where these parallel capacitors are buried in a big nest of other capacitors. Be very careful about blindly relating changes in voltage to the voltage across the battery without first considering whether or not the battery is directly connected to the capacitors. In this case, they are. But they may not always be, and you need to be very cautious about this. It will simply be generally true that if you have one or two capacitors in parallel with one another, that they will definitely be at the same voltage, whatever that is. Well, the next thing we want to consider is the fact that the charge separation in the circuit has to be looked at. So we've used conservation of energy to relate voltage changes in the circuit. Let's look at conservation of charge now. So we have delta VB, we have c1, we have c2. So there's going to be some plus q1 and minus q1 charge separation here, and some plus q2 and minus q2 charge separation here. Now, if I hypothesize again that I can combine these in some way using math and get an equivalent capacitance, cEq, and this time for parallel capacitors, then here I will have some plus q total. We'll call this plus qEq and some minus qEq. By conservation of charge, it must be true that whatever q equivalent is on the plates of the capacitors, it's equal to q1 plus q2. That's the only way charge conservation can work out. So if this is possible, then this must be true. Since charge is conserved, it must be true that the sum of the charges on the two parallel capacitors, q1 and q2, will give me the total charge on the equivalent capacitor. So this is the equation I'm going to start from to try to solve for the relationship between capacitance 1, capacitance 2, and the equivalent capacitance. Each capacitor has its own capacitance equation, and since the equivalent capacitor is connected directly to the battery, we know that this is delta VB right here. There's also q1, which is equal to c1 delta V1, and we know from looking at the electric potential changes on the circuit that this is c1 delta VB. And then there's q2, which equals c2 delta V2, and again that's c2 delta VB. And so if I run this equation to its natural conclusion, I find out that substituting in with the capacitor equations, cq delta VB is equal to c1 delta VB plus c2 delta VB. The delta VBs cancel on both sides of the equation, and I find out that for parallel capacitors, all I have to do to get the equivalent capacitance is add the capacitances together directly. And in general, if I were to put a whole bunch of capacitors in parallel with one another like this, so here's 1, 2, 3, 4, for instance, then all I have to do to get the equivalent capacitance is sum from i equals 1 to n parallel ci. That would be the general relationship between the equivalent capacitance of this, for instance, 4 capacitor parallel network and the individual capacitances of each of the capacitors in the network. A final comment. What if you have a circuit that looks like this? Oh my, let's stop and think. Are there any capacitors that are only in series or only in parallel with one another? Well, if you've had a chance to think about that, you'll notice that these two right here are in parallel with each other. This is helpful because that means that we can write down a c equivalent for these two capacitors. We can change this circuit into this circuit using the rules of adding capacitances for two parallel capacitors. So if I label these now c1, c2, and c3. Here's c1 and ceq. What I find out is that because 2 and 3 are directly in parallel with each other, they're both at the same electric potential difference. Their charges, however, are different and I can use what I just did with parallel capacitors up here and I can add their capacitances together like so. This then gives me this circuit. I can go one more. I see that c1 is now in parallel with ceq. If I want to know the total capacitance of the network of three capacitors, now all I have to do is remember that 1 over c total will be equal to 1 over c1 plus 1 over ceq. I can use a little algebra and I can invert and solve for these total, c total here. If I do a little algebra, what I'll find out is for this two capacitor case, all I have to do is multiply c1 and ceq divided by their sum. We will encounter networks of capacitors that are very complicated. This is the simplest complicated example I can give you. You'll see more complicated ones than this, but the idea is simple. Once you know the rules of how to add capacitances in parallel and in series, study the network, find a pair or a triplet or whatever, a group of capacitors that are very obviously only in series with each other or only in parallel with each other and combine them into a single equivalent capacitance. Redraw your network. Look at it again. Now, what capacitors do you see that are most obviously and directly in series and in parallel with each other? Combine them using the rules of combining capacitances for the appropriate situation. Redraw your network and keep doing this until you get down to a simple one battery, one capacitor network. That's your goal in any of these. You might be asked, for instance, at the end of a problem to find out the voltage just across c2, knowing only the voltage across the battery. Once you get to this circuit, you now know the voltage across the total capacitor here is the voltage across the battery. And then you can use the rules of parallel and series capacitors to unpack the network and figure out what the charges and voltages are on each individual capacitor in the network. We'll work some problems in class that will help you to understand better how to do that kind of mechanics with problem solving for these style of problems.


Hey guys, it's Nate, AKA the Foot Accountant, and welcome back to the channel. EA absolutely surprised us yesterday with an SBC. They impacted the market so much, but it came out of nowhere because the SBC looks so small, and looks like if we do nothing, but the pack has crazy odds for some specific team of the seasons, and those prices are dropping like mad on this market. I wanna take a look at that, and of course, could we invest in those prices that are down bad because of all the supply that we had yesterday. So we'll talk about that and how the market could react today. Sundays, icon pack, hero pack days, there is potential today for one of those sorts of packs to be released in this game as an SBC, and of course, team of the season content continuing to roll out. So we'll talk about all that in today's video one more. If you're excited for it, if it helps, we ought to drop a thumbs up. That supports the channel a ton, and of course, subscribe if you are new to never miss the daily videos as they go live. But let's look at yesterday's content and start things off. First of all, we had a player SBC. We'd known that this flashback of the flay was coming and we actually got it. Four star, four star. I think we would have really liked a five star skill or five star week of version of this card for the extra juice, but at the price, we really can't complain like 50,000 coins for this card. Kind of reminds me of the Pedro that we had during foot birthday. If you have Pedro, in my opinion, there's no real reason to do this. I think Pedro is probably clear since these five star, five star over this card, but not terrible value there. Even for a 90 rated card, like if you have some extra fodder in your club, in the next couple of days as we have player picks, you get two 86s in here. You get a random team of the week. I mean, it is an 85 rated squad, but you put two 86s or higher in there or if you have a duplicate Tots card, it's gonna be really easy to get this SBC done just for some, I guess, interesting card to try out or 90 rated fodder. So don't throw that one away just because you're like, no, it's not worth it. It might actually be worth it if you have some duplicates with the 81 plus player picks that we are gonna get most likely tomorrow. On Monday, we also had some new store packs added yesterday, including the 400K pivot pack, which a lot of people are asking, Nate, are team of the season cards in these? I mean, they are like team of the season cards are in these packs. It's just the odds are not showing. So obviously with 70 gold rare players with five guaranteed to be 86 or above, team of the seasons are definitely packable from these packs. It's just people think they're not because of the, you know, odds that are in here, but they definitely are packable from those. They keep releasing these second half packs and these are some crazy packs. 25% chance of a Tots player in a 200K pack that is tradable, 60 items. I think for 3000 FIFA points, I'm sure a lot of people in this game are opening that pack. All the second half, you know, whatever rare players packs that have been released as a lightning rounds or as like eight per day like this one, there's a lot of FIFA point sales right now for sure as EA is making that bank by putting a lot of really good packs out during team the season. Now the SBC that is really at hand though is one that I've already completed. So it's easier to look at it in here. It's the Tots challenge one. This is the small little, you know, looks innocent, right? This SBC looks really innocent when you look at it right away, but then you look at the pack that it gives out. 5000 coins, really easy to do. It gives out a five Netherlands Gold Rare Players pack. I don't even remember this being added to the code, but five Netherlands Gold Rare Players right now, you think about, okay, Dutch rare gold players that are in this game. Yeah, you've got a lot of low rated cards like 80, 81s, maybe some 79 stuff like that. But at the same time, you've got some Tots cards and you have some good high rated fodder like Memphis DePie and Virgil Van Dijk. In fact, I believe there are only 28 Dutch Gold Rare cards that are in packs right now. And out of those 28, you've got a team of the week, Malin. You've got all the Tots cards that are of course Dutch and you've got some good fodder cards with Delik, DePie, Van Dijk and DeYoung. And if you look at prices on the market, I'm sure you guys have seen, the prices of these cards have absolutely gotten destroyed. Any Dutch card on this game yesterday got destroyed in price. Javi Simons, how much right now? 690,000 coins after he was 1.3 mil. I bought a Javi Simons last night. I bought it too early. I bought it for over a million coins. I sold it right here for 1.14. I made like 60K and he still went to 1.3 mil. But when this pack dropped, he went from 1.3 mil coins all the way to 690,000 coins. Literally prices on all of the Dutch Tots cards yesterday halved. They were down 40 to 50% in price. Gear Trudeau, one of the most meta center backs for a budget on this game from 100K down to 50. Crazy drop there. Bergwijn was like 140,000 coins, I think. Almost 140K, right? 160K he went to yesterday. He went down to 60,000 coins, 58K there. Crazy price drops because of what it is here, the supply. It's pure supply that this pack really injected to the market. It's not like it was panic selling. It was people were opening that five Dutch Rare Goal Players pack and they were getting Tots cards. They were getting Virgil van Dijk as a gold, right? If you look at Virgil van Dijk, he's one of the cheapest 90 rated cards right now in this game because he got packed so much yesterday. Now I feel like me, you're like, man, where was my pack look? All I got was like hot to bowers. The best card from that five Rare Goal Players pack. But it is obvious that since there were so few Dutch Rare Goals, they got supplied so much. Now the question is, why did EA do this? Well, I think first of all, they probably wanted to supply some Dutch cards onto people's clubs because we had that Air2Visit Tots Cup that is, of course, you have to play with Air2Visit players so they knew that people would be going out and wanting to try the Air2Visit Tots cards for that. Of course, when EA released a pack like this, they definitely know it's gonna have big market impact and that does make people lose coins. So I don't try to point the finger at EA and say, hey, they legit did this so that people would lose coins. I mean, you saw all the price drop-offs on these teams this season. If you were trying a Tots card for your team and you go check content with the card in your team and you bought it before, you're like, wow, I literally am losing half of the prices card of what I bought it for two hours later, do EA really calculate in those things? We'll never know, but I think that's part of the reason that they did it personally because they knew the prices would drop off a lot and if people lose coins, they make more money because people go and buy FIFA points, but that's getting into the hairy stuff. And then the real little question here is, should we invest in some of these cards? Because you've got more Air2Visit SBC players that are leaked to come. You think about the goalkeeper, Bijlo, I think his name is, is expected to drop. I'm gonna pick up the skier Truda, just kidding, I'm not. That's a goalkeeper from the Air2Visit that people are expecting as an SBC or an objective. And I think a lot of people are investing in some of these cards because they feel like their prices have gotten too cheap or where they realistically should be. And to a point, I agree, 50K for one of the only 90-page centerbacks in this game, in this skier Truda, is pretty crazy. Javi Simon's being as cheap as he is, is pretty crazy, right? Okay, this is probably the most popular card that people are looking to invest in right now. And with good reason, a Premier League center back with Manchester City links is 200,000 coins. He was like 180, it is cheapest yesterday. He's been around 190K since the pack dropped. But 200,000 coins for this card is really crazy when you think about we've got Premier League tats upcoming and a lot of those Premier League centerbacks that are gonna be in this next iteration of tats are probably gonna be a lot more expensive than this. This is a really good card in game with the links, the stats and everything. This looks like a great investment. Now, am I gonna be investing in this stuff? I may buy a couple, but since this price is already up a little bit, I'm going to be careful. On the grand scheme of things, this price for Ake 190, that looks really cheap, right? That's honestly too cheap, but you have to realize that the amount of supply that was just dropped on this game for these cards, somebody actually tweeted me yesterday. Now this is glitched right now, but somebody tweeted me a picture of themselves searching all of the team of the season Ake's that were on the market and they had to scroll through on this market search. It was like 330 pages to see all of the supply for Ake.  So that is the bad thing about this card as an investment and all the Dutch tats cards that were dropped in the game yesterday in price. The bad thing is there is so much supply, but the good thing is these are really in demand cards as the first team of the season Ake next week is gonna be in demand as well and they're really, really cheap prices. So I think there is investment potential here, but I think what you really need to do is look for a drop today on Sunday because these guys got so supplied and people are still doing this AirDivisi or the Dutch SBC pack. I think what I would do today is try to get on some bids, try to get on some snipes. If we have really good content today, some of these guys could drop a little bit more. I would say that would be a good time to look into these guys and I think you'd have to end up holding them for probably a week or so because at the same time, a lot of people are investing in the same stuff. Ake is probably gonna be the most popularly invested in card during these next couple of days in this game because people will see the potential in his card to rise during prem tots. So just be careful with that. There is potential there, but there's also gonna be a lot of investors and there's just a ton of supply on the market for those cards. So be careful. But I think guys like Ake, Bergwein, Geertrude and Javi Simons could go up. So just be careful with that. Investage at your own risk, but I think there is potential there because these guys do seem really cheap for me even though their impacts throughout the whole rest of this next week. Now for the rest of the market, a lot of other tots cards are doing pretty well. Now they are lower in price. We expect that, right? Bernardo Sobo is like 1.3 mil. He is now back down to 1.07. He's actually, he was just, I believe, around 1.05. He's actually going up a little bit. Alexis Sanchez was another one I had in my eye on. He was about 1.17. Looks like he's starting to go back up a little bit. These guys get really rare at night. Then they start to rebound back up in price. But team of the season cards had some really good fluctuations yesterday. I bought a Kingsley Coman at, I don't even remember what I bought this for. We made a good flip out of him. We made a good flip on the Totaches, right? We talked about that in the last night's video. I bought all these at 105K. He was up into the 130s. The Javi Simons is on there. And I've been selling a lot of the other cards from my transfer list just to take the profits, right? I've been taking a lot of coins. You can see I have a lot of coins right now. I've got 8.1 mil. They're almost fully liquid, apart from having a few cards in the transfer list. I still believe that these cards I would be careful with. I do not think there's gonna be a ton of prices like going up today. I don't think we're gonna have as crazy of a rise on these Toss cards as we did yesterday. Kingsley Coman is, wow, 508. I bought one at 515 and I thought that was really cheap. But last night Coman was 580. He went all the way to 689. This is the fluctuation that I traded with. And now he's back down to 500K. Now could this go back up to like 550 today? You know, I think it absolutely could, which is why I'm interested here. But at the same time, I'm being very careful because it normally doesn't happen two days in a row where you have that same kind of fluctuation. Wow, 507, that's really crazy. He was legit just 550K. So I like the rarity there. I like the rarity on some of these more expensive cards, but I'm gonna just do quick flips. I do not think buying these and holding them for right now, holding them for longer than like a day or a couple of hours, honestly, is really a good move. I would probably stay pretty liquid and I would not look to hold onto them too long. Same thing with the cards from the AirDivisitots as well. Just be careful with them because I do believe they will drop in price further today as we get more supply, as people finish their week in weeks, get more supply on the market, all that good stuff. Sell teams, sell cards, people are trying. Otherwise than that, the market is doing really, really well. Out-of-packs cards continue to rise. I think of like David Alaba, who was 580,000 coins. He is now, what is his price? 700K, 710, he is going up in price. A lot of these other out-of-packs special cards just continue to rise. Sell when you're happy with the profit, guys. We said it yesterday, we'll say it again today. Sell when you're happy with the profit on the card that you bought. I was happy with some of those profits. I sold some cards. We made a good amount of coins. Could have made a lot more if we would have bought later, but it is what it is. Now, let's talk about the market today on Sunday too. Let's shift our focus because there's a lot of potential for today on Sunday as well in terms of the SBCs that we could be getting. First of all, if it's not happening on a Saturday, it's happening on a Sunday, the icon or the hero upgrade slash player pick pack, right? This 90 plus goes away and it's going away today at content time. What's gonna replace it? There's going to be something that replaces this today whether it's this exact same SBC, a new icon upgrade or a hero upgrade of some sorts. I do believe there will be a new upgrade SBC today. So we'll just have to wait and see what that is. I don't think there's any new pack code that is added as of right now. So watch out for maybe some leaks today on that. I'm very curious to see what happens there. So you might think about Nate, could I invest in fodder? And honestly guys, I like the way fodder is right now, especially on the low tier, 84s. I know it's like, why would I buy 84s for an icon pack or something like that? Trust me guys, right? What we are moving into, what we talked about before team of the season, we are moving into a time where look at the high rated fodder prices, 88s are 22k, 89s are 30,000 coins, 91s are 51k. We expected to see this drop off on the high rated fodder. I didn't really expect to see it right away, but here we are, it's definitely down because the Todd's cards just pushed the whole fodder market lower themselves anyway. And there's pretty easy to pack to get them in your club. But I like the 84s, 85s. I wish they were a little bit cheaper. I wish these guys would go down some. I don't like the potential rise there. I like 86s though, 84s and 86s because if we do get a hero pack today, if we do get an icon pack again, if you pack a Todd's card, you're packing somebody who is about 88 to 91 rated and you're probably gonna be able to put that into an SBC and then that's gonna make the rating a lot lower for you and it's gonna be a lot easier to craft. So that's one thing we very commonly see during team of the season is you see the low rated fodder do the best because that's what people are buying to finish out a squad that they can complete easier because they've got the high rated Todd's card already from whatever pack they have opened or however they've packed that card. So that's the one thing I would say about the fodder market right now. I like 84s, I like 86s and maybe 88s. Like man, those are really, really cheap on some of the 88s. So there still could be some fluctuations in and through here. Another thing to think about in this upcoming week is we'll probably get guaranteed air to busy and guaranteed community Tott's upgrade packs. That's a staple of team of the season. I even think EA might have mentioned in one of their in-game messages that that was gonna be something that was happening soon. So watch out, again I'd say maybe even some of your 83s at 850, an air to busy guaranteed Tott's pack is probably not gonna be that expensive given that most of the cards in here now are below 100,000 coins besides Tottich and Javi Simons. I think that would be a really cheap SBC. People would of course do it. A guaranteed Tott's pack, absolutely right. So I would stock up on 83s and 84s for that reason alone and then look for today's content and maybe some content upcoming to really make those prices go up some. Not like crazy, crazy rises on fodder like we saw last week with Tott's warmup but I think we could see some decent rises that could make some investments pretty profitable. So that's where I would be right now with fodder investing if I were you guys. And then if we do have a really good icon pack or if we have a really, really good hero player pick today, I do believe there could be some more panic on the actual like meta market, right? We're talking about these Tott's cards, right? There could be some more panic on these cards here if there is a really good pack today. Think about the icon pack, right? It has multiple segments inside of it and then those segments give out tradable packs that could supply more Tott's cards onto the market and make these prices go a little bit lower themselves. So that's why I'm just being careful. That's why I'm pretty liquid at the moment. I'm gonna wait to see what happens today and it's just gonna be a really good time this week to be looking at top tier meta cards from the big leagues, specifically the big league, Premier League, right? That's something that we're gonna have to watch out for this week as well. Premier League special cards as we head into this next week of Premier League team of the season. But today could be a day to watch the market if there is a really good pack, SPC dropped. Also today, we've got some other leaks though, right? Like we haven't talked about yet seeing the Alan St. Maximon potential card that could be a Tott's Moments SPC.  Is that gonna be an SPC? Is that gonna be a card that is released in packs? I think there's some potential that maybe EA would do a mini release today. Guys that have not been dropped in this game yet, Luke DeYoung, we haven't seen. We have not seen the Alan St. Maximon as I mentioned and we also have not seen Matoma. So Matoma, ASM and Bijlo thrown in there as well with Luke DeYoung. Those are all cards that we are like kind of wondering, okay EA, where are these guys at? When are we gonna see them? They're leaked as moments cards. So not actual team the seasons, but moments. And yeah, I'm so curious to see if we got a mini release today or if those are gonna be SPCs. I don't think they'd be a mini release because if you think about it, we're supposed to have everything available in packs and week in league rewards. So if they were not available in week in league rewards then I don't know how they'd be able to be released in packs right now. So that's kind of a curious thought to have. But we'll probably see what happens today with that. I would expect SPCs for those, but who knows? So watch out for that. And I think today we're getting another SPC for the season swaps objective. April 30th, TOT season swaps, yeah, SPC number two. So I don't know what they're gonna drop today man. Maybe they drop like maybe an English pack and like Declan Rice tavernier like drop crazy amounts in value. I don't know, it's just kind of a guess. I doubt that would happen, but I don't know what they're gonna do for the, I guess reward from this SPC today. So watch out very closely on the reward for that SPC today as well. But honestly guys, it was an absolute wild rollercoaster day yesterday with these prices on the market with these Dutch cards. I mean, Virgil van Dijk was the cheapest. I think, what is this? Yeah, 90 rated. He was the cheapest 90 rated card on this game. I think he still is right down there like 38,000 coins as I very closely watched in these TOT's cards for a flip here. He was down really, really cheap. Everything, everything man was so, so low. If it was Dutch, it was getting packed in supply and it was absolutely wild. So that was a pretty crazy happening yesterday. I haven't seen anything happen like that on this game in a really, really long time. And again, I'll reiterate, you just have to be careful investing in that. I know that Acke seems crazy, crazy cheap. And to be honest, I might pick up an Acke or two just to see if I can, you know, hold on to it for a couple of days, you know, and make a profit later on next week.  And it looked like yesterday a ton of people were investing at the time because it was almost impossible to get a snipe on this guy yesterday at like 185K, which was around his lowest point. So if you bought there and you're holding GGs, oh my gosh, 150, there's no way I was gonna win that. But yeah, if I see anything under 190, I might have to pick it up just to hold on to one or two of them and see what's gonna happen because there's gonna be a lot of hype for this car and the fact that he's this cheap, I mean, it does seem very, very cheap. But again, you've got so much supply. So that's gonna be a very interesting thing to watch today. Also the weekend league, like just the way the rewards are kind of paying out. Gonna be very interesting to see how the market does tomorrow on Monday. Usually we have a Monday market rise because of that. That's one thing I'll be very curious to see going forward into tomorrow, how things are gonna go with that different weekend league schedule and the market. So that's the video for today, guys. If you did enjoy, drop a thumbs up on a comment below if you have any questions and subscribe. If you are new, I'll see you guys in a stream today. It's been Nathan with a counter, catch you guys later. Peace, out.


This study used hyperspectral remote sensing data collected from unmanned aerial vehicles, UAVs, to identify characteristic bands for detecting rice false smut. The authors then optimized these bands to improve the accuracy of the model for predicting the presence of rice false smut. Finally, they identified two specific wavelength ranges, 698 to 800 nanometers and 974 to 997 nanometers, as being most sensitive to the presence of rice false smut. This article was authored by Yanxiang Wang, Min Fengxing, Hong Guozhang, and others.


Let me toss up a 28-footer inside Davis, can't get it to fall, kept alive by Tyrell. Second chance won't go for Gardner. Tyrell with a rebound again. In transition Hughes three up, three down! One Hughes for three.


This study developed a novel 3D liver tissue model that mimicked the complex vasculature system and drug-depleted extracellular matrix of human livers. It was used to evaluate the effectiveness of transarterial chemoembolization treatments for primary liver cancer. The model showed that it could accurately predict the success rate of treatments by measuring the amount of drug released from the tumor and how quickly it diffused out of the tumor. This article was authored by Xiaoya Liu, Shuiying Wang, Yu Qingluo, and others.


Good afternoon everyone, welcome to the summer, it's finally begun I think, it's going to get hotter tomorrow and it won't rain until after tomorrow, trust me. Your speaker this afternoon, Andy Piper, he's a founding member of the IBM Virtual Universe community and that's a pretty significant feature but I'm going to let him tell you today about the lightweight messaging process. Over to you Andy. Thank you very much Tony. Well thank you for coming all the way down to Elblock, I was convinced this morning that it was a conspiracy to ensure I had a small audience to make us walk on extra few meters round. Yes, I'm Andy, I've been with IBM for nearly 10 years now and I work in our lab in the UK. This is my first time in your country or Australia for those of you who aren't originally from Australia itself.  I've been a Linux user longer than I've been with IBM. I use it as my day-to-day desktop now at work, I've been doing that for a couple of years and I actually work on our internal distribution or it's not a distribution, it's a layer of software that goes on top for Ubuntu and Debian at IBM. We also have flavours for red hat and Fedora. So one of the reasons I really wanted to come to LCA, apart from the fact that I'm a massive geek and I've just been getting really excited about all of the folks who've been here this week, is because I've recently become the community lead for some of our WebSphere software, the WebSphere messaging portfolio. And it's quite an interesting thought really because IBM whilst we're very friendly towards the open source community, we do obviously self software and one of the things I like to do is actually to explain to people why I'm so excited about some of the stuff we have in our kit bag and also hopefully to talk to you about some cool stuff that is available to you to play around with. So what is all this about?  The idea is that we've got kind of super computers in the palms of our hands increasingly and not only that, we have a very connected world as we heard this morning and we've heard all week from our keynote speakers and we have other devices which are not necessarily as intelligent as a smartphone, they don't necessarily have the processing capabilities or the memory capacity, they may just have the ability to send some information. So just before lunch I was in the E4 power presentation and they were talking about how easy it is just to throw some sensors on something. That's absolutely true and that's what has increasingly been happening around the world. So if you've seen any advertising around IBM in the last couple of years we've been talking about this kind of equation. So this is IBM's idea of a smarter planet, it comes in three eyes, instrumented, interconnected and intelligent and it all adds up to a happier, brighter, smarter world. Let me put that into some proper context and some technical context for you. This is my busiest slide probably and it's probably the most corporate one and then I will move away from some of this stuff but I think it's really quite relevant and something which often we don't think about as part of the open source community when we're just kind of hacking on some cool end user app source and some cool network apps or whatever we're doing. So if we look at kind of the trajectory of corporate IT over the last let's say 20 years we've built up data centers, increasing those are clouds and things but we've got our corporate data centers, our head offices and that's where we get all our information from our business and we do our data munging and try and work out what's going on and what's useful to our business. Forget all the stuff on the side, I don't want to sell you IBM's software necessarily. More importantly we've got transactional information and transactions happening in our regional facilities, they could be stores, they could be hospitals, they could be government offices, it depends what industry we're in. So we want to get that information where our business is being done and we want to pull it together, we want to be able to transform between the different data formats that are being used and that's where the interconnected piece comes in. So if you follow the language of enterprise IT, something that's been going on for the last eight to ten years is something called service oriented architecture and the enterprise service bus. So the idea there is that we want our applications to be nice, self-contained services that we can invoke. This is where the web services stuff comes from, the soap and rest ideas that we just want to invoke with these things, get some information out and then convert it and transfer it somewhere else. So intelligence, interconnectedness. The piece that's been kind of missing or been a bit weaker in the overall story particularly within the corporate context has been this layer at the bottom. Now we know that we have had heating and air conditioning systems and intelligent industrial network gateways and things for a long time but what we haven't been successfully able to do easily is to join those things up, is to get the information from them in a standard way and again we heard about that if you were in the E4 power meter presentation this morning. Get that information out and then use it as part of our connected enterprise. And also as we've heard from Vint Cerf and others this week, the numbers of devices at this level are just exploding and again we're not just talking about mobiles although several people have highlighted those, they are an important part of the overall picture. We're talking about sensors that are connected and have the ability to connect to an IP network. So about ten years ago, one of IBM's distinguished engineers, a gentleman called Dr. Andy Stanford Clark who you can find out plenty about online, he's also on Wikipedia I believe, was working with some industrial automation companies and with some oil companies and doing some research into the pervasive messaging space and he really saw an opportunity for some of these proprietary protocols, he said, the man from IBM to be opened up. Very interesting story around IBM actually, if you read Lou Gerson who's the former chairman of IBM's story of how he was the chairman and CEO in the early 90s, sorry, the mid 90s and how he kind of started to try and turn people in IBM around towards opening up and following a standards based approach. So I joke as much as the next person about the proprietary nature of some of our products but we have moved a long way in the direction of openness. So Andy saw an opportunity here for a protocol which could be used on these limited embedded devices and we're talking ten years ago, we're not talking about devices that had gigahertz processes and masses of memory and storage and fast networks necessarily to improve this integration story. So let's think about some of the design principles that are important when you're dealing with that environment. The ten year ago environment of sensors and so on. So it's quite useful if we can take an events based approach to this. So we're going to publish information, we're going to say I'm transmitting information and it's about power or it's about temperature. So you're just giving it a label or a topic and you're just sending some information. And then equally I can say I want to subscribe to all of the information about temperature across the whole of Australia for example. We really want to minimize the on-the-wire footprint because our wires may not be wires, they may be satellite connections which are really expensive to run, they might be telephone lines where we want to get the packets as small as possible. And equally those connections might be disrupted, we might be working in a remote oil field, we might be working in the middle of a desert, those may not be very stable environments. So we are absolutely optimizing for low bandwidth, high latency and unreliable networks which may cost a lot to run. We also need to be aware that the applications that are consuming this information and therefore embedding our client libraries may have very limited processing power themselves. So we want to minimize the complexity of the code we are presenting to them. But equally if we've got a big server or an iPhone or an Android phone these days which can do whizzy things then fine, well we can use that capability, no problem. It's not slow just because it has to be slow, it's not slow at all. Now the last point is the one which is kind of interesting from both from a perspective of this community, the open source community and from an IBM perspective which is that the protocol which was jointly developed by Andy and one of our business partners, Alan Nipper, is published and is published in a royalty free manner. So anybody can look at this protocol, sign my developer's website and they can go ahead and implement either the client or the server side and I'll talk about that in a moment. It's also really important because IBM although we do support a wide variety of hardware architectures and part of that is our heritage, we've got on the main frame, we've got the P chips, we've got the others as well. We simply can't test every possible embedded device, right, so text instruments, all these other processes that are around, we simply can't test everything and we don't know what people might want to use in the future. So low complexity in footprint, very, very simple semantics to the protocol that we're using here. So we effectively just have three verbs or four verbs, if five verbs, maybe connect, publish, subscribe and unsubscribe from a topic and disconnect, that's it. And we're delivering the messages asynchronously, so this is not a synchronous protocol. We do not have to be awake at both ends of the client and receiver connection, we are sending messages asynchronously. We're keeping the messages in the packets very, very small. The smallest I think is two bytes if you're just sending the message headers. We don't have the capability unlike something like JMS to put our own application headers in. You're just giving the messaging fabric a payload, a very basic payload, which is a bit bit stream, byte array. We also, because we've said that we need to cope with the fact that our network might suddenly vanish or and it may vanish for a long period of time, which might be important if we're a nuclear monitoring system, right? We need to know something's gone away. We have this concept of the last will and testament, so we can say, when we register as a publisher or a subscriber, we can say, by the way, Mr. Server that I'm talking to, if I ever go away, please publish this as my kind of last will and testament, my death message, my last words, so that somebody else can hear about it and take action for us. So that's really high level and we will look at some code and dive a bit deeper. Hi. You can specify what your keep alive is basically. What I should have said at the beginning is I've got quite a few slides to go through. I'm really happy to take questions. I really want to talk to everyone. It may be easier if I leave some of them towards the end, because I may come back to some of those as well as we go through. Thanks very much, so that's great. So, MQTT, but haven't we got like some network protocols like there's this one called HTTP that virtually every device these days supports? And this is a question that I get, I built this part in, because I get challenged on it. We'll get asked this question a lot. I'm not here to inflame any kind of war between these protocols. I just want to show some of the differences that can help to enable, hopefully, a slightly clearer choice between them in certain circumstances. Because HTTP, although it is almost ubiquitous, is not completely ubiquitous, and may not always be the right choice. So MQTT doesn't care about puts and gets of documents. It's just sending very small packets of data. And I'm just going to whiz through these differences. You'll be able to look this up later. It's a really simple. HTTP is also arguably really simple, right? It's just put get, post, delete, whatever other things they've added as the HTTP protocol has gone along. But you have to handle all the return codes, 400, 404, 500, 201, 200. You have to potentially cope with all those things, or the HTTP stack does some of that for you admittedly. It's really light on the network. If you start to think about sending some information over an HTTP post, the headers start to potentially, and I'm talking about comparing a protocol which is very, very small and very, very lightweight to something which is a bit texty at the top. There is a difference between the two. And depending on the need to get a document and then fill in some information and then post a form back, that can be bigger. We've got distribution built in because we're publishing and subscribing. So we are saying, just publish this information on my behalf for me. And the broker, which sits in the middle, is going to do the web server if you like, if you're coming from an HTTP land, is going to do all that distribution for you. Now with HTTP, you're going to have a whole bunch of puts and gets and things to do to achieve the same kind of thing. It's possible to mediate and have something in the middle and IBM sells products that do that kind of thing for you if you need them. But there are, I'm sure, alternatives available. The point is that the protocol here is building all that stuff in for you, or the model is doing so. And we're very, very lightweight. So we're lightweight both on the CPU side and in the amount of memory used by the libraries and by the broker. So the reference implementation that you can download for free from IBM, which we'll talk about in a moment, is very, very small as a binary. Ideal for those, I don't know, those slug boxes or any kind of embedded Linux system. I'm not saying HTTP is a big stack. Almost many platforms have it as part of their base libraries. But then when you start to add in XML and JSON and all the other things you may need to do, then the whole thing can potentially grow. And finally, we've got the ability to ask for different qualities of service with MQTT. So the quality of service zero is basically just far and forget. Best efforts, it'll get there if we can send it there. And then you have one and two, and I'm not going to go into them in detail today, which give you the ability to kind of get confirmations. So, well, I've listed off a whole bunch of advantages and things that make me excited about this protocol. It is really easy to get started.  Now, isn't it interesting that I've said at the beginning that we are 10 years down the line from when Andy invented this thing? Well, it's kind of been skulking around in the corners of some of our solutions. In the last couple of years, IBM has taken some steps to clarify the terms under which the licensing is royalty-free, or the protocol is royalty-free. And we've also actually released an extension to one of our core products to actually integrate this protocol into it as well. So even if you're not an open-source developer, even if you are an open-source developer, you can then, if you wish, in the future, join up to an enterprise deployment of this instead of your free version. And I've listed off a whole bunch of APIs and things on the side there, and I'll come back to talk a bit more about that in a moment. That's from our community website, which, as you may have noticed, if you've been observant, some of you may have already looked is MQTT.org. This is an example of something that one of my colleagues from here in Australia, Chris Yeo, has done to his house, actually. So he's implemented a broker, one of these MQTT brokers, little mediation apps that sits in the middle, to manage his home automation system, massively popular way of getting going with home automation. I've spoken a couple of times in questions and answer sessions at the Arduino MiniConf and earlier this morning about the fact that I'm part of a community in the UK called Homecamp, which is about home automation, energy saving, green IT at home. And lots of people are doing things with MQTT in that space. So for example, he has some scripts which are controlling an Arduino-controlled ambient orb, which is lighting up to say how much power is being used. He's got some no-maplets running on desktop, so he can immediately monitor and you see it subscribing to the power and the temperature in different parts of the house. So he's immediately getting on his desktop those kind of bits of information. And one of the things he's just added is a simple web page which he can control from his phone, which is doing PHP, talking MQTT under the covers to turn things on and off and check the state of things. I'm going to whiz through some of these examples. Dan Fish, I've linked all the relevant blog posts or links in the presentation here, has been looking at how to garden his, water his garden without leaving his armchair. Actually, Sarah Sharp is over in, over in F509 at the moment, talking about something very similar. She's not using MQTT yet, but I had lunch with her yesterday and I'm hopeful that we'll get her on that path before long. So he's been looking, if you look at his blog post, he's been evaluating various things like Arduino's and various other devices to work out how he can best hire this together. So he's proposing using the Mosquito MQTT broker there. This is one of my colleagues from the UK, Ben Hardill, who's been doing some great stuff. He got a big screen TV and then he thought, wouldn't it be cool if, if my house ever got burgled, I could have a camera on top of the TV. This is kind of similar to some of the stuff that Jonathan Oxford was talking about yesterday. And it turned on the camera and the burglar saw himself on the TV and scared himself and ran away. But he's kind of developed this. He's got a home automation system also based on the topics and you can see here and he's got his power meter online, so he knows what that is. He's also discovered that these LG TVs have got a serial port. So he's built a PHP library which allows you to control the TV and then he's got that sort of MQTT and he's got an Android app which enables him to turn the television on and off. Apparently he likes to leave the house with the television on and go to work with the television on, not the kind of thing I generally do, but Ben does, so he's been building things there. It gets even more interesting because my colleague here, Nico Leary, who's the guy in the middle just up there, was on TV. This is a BBC television program called Bango's The Theory last year where they decided to try out these mind control or these headsets that read brain waves. And they decided that, rather than just use them to move around in second life or whatever else you might do with them, they hooked them up to two London black cabs and raced them around a racetrack. Kevin Brown over on the left there is another guy that I work with in our lab. He's been experimenting with a lot of the mind, the brain sensing stuff. Nick actually is one of the core MQTT developers, so he's been working on this stuff for a long time and he's also developed the Arduino MQTT library. So these guys got to go on BBC TV and although I gather it was really, really cold, the day they recorded it, which is their just desserts, I think, as far as I'm concerned, for doing something far too cool. You can see for more entertaining, Chris Phillips, he's actually one of the guys I mentor at work, decided to hook up some rubber ducks. It's a long story as to how he came to have a mini Cooper full of rubber ducks, but apparently he did, and he used them as his kind of ambient power alerting device. So loads of things and I've kind of gone for the fun and trivial ones. We'll come back to some more examples in a minute because I have been talking quite a lot already and being a group of hackers you're probably interested in what you might want to do to get hold of some of this stuff. So there are two ways, this is the official way that I'm obligated to tell you about. A few years ago, about three years ago, we released something that we called the really small message broker. I believe we wanted to call it something different, perfectly clean, but it's just that somebody else had the name already, so we had to rename it really small message broker, RSMB. It's free for personal use, if you want to start to use it in a commercial situation, then the terms of the alpha words license means you need to talk to us and we'll see how we can help you. It's quite straightforward, there's lots and lots of different binary versions available, I use the word binary in a pointed way, including things like the the link sys routers that you can run Linux on, but unfortunately we haven't currently made the source available to you. There is another option which one of these guys in the UK, a very very cool person called Roger Light, who I've yet to meet in person, but we've been talking a lot on Twitter and on IRC. He's built this thing called Mosquito with two Ts, get it? And it's really, really straightforward to install, he's got a download page which gives instructions as packages for whatever your favorite Linux distribution flavor is, Windows and the Mac, and you can also get it from Bitbucket, he's using Mercurial for development. The nice thing about it is that it also has, unlike the IBM one, the IBM one comes with some utilities that are written in C and a library, he's also done some Python stuff in there as well, which the Python stuff for his stuff works with our stuff because it's all kind of one protocol and it's all the same and it's kind of nice. The other thing that he's done so far is that his last version he added IPv6 support, which IBM doesn't believe have yet, so I will go back to the UK and kick someone until that appears. And there's lots and lots of client APIs, so lots of people are playing around with this. Now, IBM being IBM, we focus on certain areas of the market and typically we still put out C and Java APIs for things. It would be difficult for us to release every flavor of API. So there's a whole bunch of things available. You can use the Java one to do Android coding as, for example, you've seen Ben has been doing. One of the things, it's one of my pet projects is at the Kindle, the Amazon Kindle actually is a Linux device, which just has a Java SDK, which Amazon seem quite reticent, although they let you sign up for it, they seem quite reticent to actually let you have the jars to do anything with. Unfortunately, if you've jailbroken your Kindle and you've SSHed onto it, then it's fairly straightforward to get hold of the jars you need. So one of the things I want to do is to build an app for the Kindle at some stage. Not because I want to throw video all over the screen because clearly you can't do that with a Kindle, but I think it's just a really nice lightweight, long battery life device for consuming basic information, graphs, or charts, or some kind of numerical information. If you're into .NET, Mono, there's some stuff out there. If you're into Delphi, anybody? Delphi? No? No? No? Okay, at least they've seen it's mended. How do we know, as I mentioned, that's pretty stable and mature. Some guys from the University of Queensland, I went to see them on Tuesday. I took some time off from the conference. So they've been doing some research into pervasive messaging themselves as part of a summer study program, and they've recently ported it to another embedded prototyping platform called the Embed. So that is some really cool work just before Christmas. The Embed is a little, it's just a bit bigger than a kind of average USB stick. Just plug it into your machine. It appears as a USB storage device. Their IDE is in the clouds. It runs in the browser. You do your coding, and then you just download the binary straight onto the USB storage, and away you go. It's really quite funky. So I set that up over Christmas attached to one wire thermometer to it, and you can build some fun little things. So without further ado, let's have a look at some examples of some code. I'm not going to read every line of it to you. This is an example in Java, which is giving you the callback to do something when a publication arrives. Unsurprisingly, the Python version is significantly simpler, and in fact the whole top section there is just about setting up how to do a desktop notification using PyNotify when a message arrives. Literally, the MQTT piece is this bit of the bottom specified client ID. Let's go connect to my local MQTT server, subscribe to a topic, and then loop until something happens. We have, funnily enough, a community.  We've got a website called MQTT.org where we try to keep news and stuff flowing. We also have a list of the different client APIs that you can in fact server implementations that you can play around with. If you're using the really small message broker, you can get that from our Apple Work site and there's a forum. There's an IRC channel, which is quite fun. There's usually a few people in there. The Mosquito Project are using Launchpad for most of their development. They're using Bitbucket just for the source code piece. As I mentioned, there's this community called Homecam, which has been around for about three years now. We started off in conjunction. It was kind of a partnership between an informal partnership between IBM, current costs, the folks that make the energy monitoring meters that were mentioned in one of the talks this morning, and various other companies and organizations. There's one called Patchabay that I mentioned during the question and answer session in the E4 meter presentation. Patchabay is a cloud energy graphing thing, similar to Google Power Meter, and various other organizations. And quite honestly, I had a lot of fun just preparing for this presentation, just googling around, seeing what people have been building. I've shown you some of the examples, and I've got a few more for you on the next slide. So the top one I wouldn't recommend. Some guys decided that he's going to try hooking all this stuff up with iNotify, whichever file synchronization thing is on the file system. Spot how long it is since I've gone anywhere near kernel and file system level code. So he's got that running a kind of Dropbox alternative in his home. I wouldn't say that MQTT is optimized for that kind of environment, but it's a nice proof concept. You can use it if you want to for desktop notifications. So people have done that on both the Mac and on Ubuntu. And this guy, Oliver Smith, has done a whole bunch of things. He's blogged about loads of things. He's done one, actually, where he's taken an old rotary ammeter with a dial, and he's used it as a desktop thing, where he's hooked it up to an Arduino, and he's kind of got an analog display of his power usage in the house, which is kind of fun. I mentioned the University of Queensland research projects, and they've just got a whole bunch of different things they've been writing about. I got there on, I got to the university on Tuesday and walked in, and they just had, and it was like the Arduino Minicom. They just had so much cool stuff all over the table for me to have a look at and play with. One of the things they're building, this Lego microscope control is about four or five years old, you'll find if you look that one up. But one of the things the guys from the University of Queensland are building is a rig with an old print head to hold a microscope, and then they'll be able to take web requests to start showing people different samples on their rig, which is kind of fun. A picture of my weather station, that's a weather station I got from a supplier in the UK called Maplin, who is one of our electronic stores. It's wireless, or it's a radio transmitter, connects to a USB base station, which has got an LCD display on, but you can just plug it into the computer, get the information. There's a nice Python-based project that somebody in the UK has written to parse the information coming off these home weather stations called PYWWS. And because it's in Python, and there's a Python interface to MQTT, it's very, very easy for me to just fire all that through my broker and other people to subscribe to information about the local weather conditions. And this is just my low-power embedded Linux box that I have at home. Right. So that's kind of some of the home projects. Let me take us back up to kind of corporate enterprise level for a moment to explain how all of this fits into what IBM's doing. IBM has something called Webster MQ. If you're old enough, it used to be called MQ series. If you're not interested, then I'm sorry. It's kind of, it's what I've been doing for quite a number of years now. So it's messaging middle where MQ stands for message queuing. It supports two different types of messaging, both published and subscribed and point to point. And it's what IBM builds, it's JMS implementation on top of. Well, messaging generally in the enterprise is kind of stretching out. It's got a whole range of different qualities of service and requirements and needs. So as part of that, we've been extending its capabilities. So it's been doing kind of transactional, safe, once and once only delivery for many, many years. Some of the things we've done on top of it is to add things like file transfer over MQ, which is very reliable, very high performance messaging for the financial industry. And also we've added the ability now to connect lots and lots and lots. And I say lots and lots and lots, we've done hundreds of thousands you'll see on our performance reports of devices directly into the MQ backbone. And we've done this by releasing an extension Webster MQ telemetry, which plugs into our main MQ server, the Q manager. And then we can connect up in different ways. And this is an interesting topology diagram because I've forgotten to tell you a couple of things so far, which I'll fill in now. So that RSMB, that really small message broker that I mentioned. Well, I mentioned also that if you want to use it commercially, you need to come and talk to us. We then sell that as something called a demon for devices. So you can run it on a small box and you can use it as kind of a local point of aggregation for all your devices. MQTT, the protocol, also supports the ability to bridge brokers together. So a broker isn't standalone. You can kind of build out a network of them that share topics. And you can actually partition which topics are shared. So we can start to build out, if you like, a mesh style network or a many node network and bridge it up to the enterprise. Equally, we've got some other stuff, as I said, MQTT's been kind of hiding away in some of our products for the last few years. We've got some stuff from Lotus that contains it as well. So we can start to build out some quite interesting things. And if other people implement that protocol and many people are, then you can just connect them directly into an enterprise integration space. Here are the kind of press release style examples. But I think they're actually quite interesting because they're not the silly men driving a London taxi around a race track with brain controller. And they're actually things that are changing the way that people are living. So in this particular case, this is one of IBM's partners in the customers and partners in the US. And they have a particular challenge that they're providing healthcare and in particular monitoring of pacemaker patients throughout the US. That's a big area. And if you have a pacemaker, you need to have it checked on a regular basis because if it doesn't work, then you don't work. So many money patients, it's a day's travel to the clinic.  And that may not be very efficient use of anyone's time or money or energy usage for travel. So the way these guys have actually implemented this is that the patients have a device that reads a trace of their pacemaker every night. It gets plugged in by their bedside. And then it uses a dial up connection, very low bandwidth to send that trace to the hospital so that any inconsistencies or issues can be identified as required rather than on a regular cycle of going in. They can be monitored in a more intelligent way. There's another example here for you, which is an energy utility company in the US. And if you're familiar with the situation on the west coast of the US, you'll be familiar with the fact that they often have kind of rolling brownouts and other things to cope with the fact that they don't have enough electricity on many occasions. This particular company wants to smooth out those peak lows and understand their energy usage a bit better. So they have smart meters, and these are actual smart meters in the home rather than little digital devices that sit on the desk and show you how much you're using. And they are able to potentially, if they see too much load, potentially just ask the customer's smart meter to turn down the air con, for example, by one degree, for example, for a short period of time just to balance out the energy usage across the network. So those are some of the ways this stuff's being used. I'm quite excited by it, as you may be able to tell from my general springiness. I've been a little less springy than I have been on other occasions, and I blame that on the Australian, debilitating Australian heat having come from the horrendous British winter. That's all I wanted to tell you about. I encourage you to take a look at the protocol and the free software that's being developed around it. It's really, very cool. You can join it all up. It's like Lego. You just plug it all together. Any questions? Yeah, thanks for that, Andy. In my former life, I used to be an electrical engineer and while I sort of left that game about 14, 15 years ago, I did work a lot with, I guess, what originally was the OSI protocols using MMS, Manufacturing Messaging Protocol, and then that sort of evolved a little bit into Fieldbus, the Fieldbus platform, Coffeebus. I know there was quite a few issues around licensing, but they certainly had the same goals around small messages, low RS485 running at 48K, and stuff like that. I'm just wondering, this seems like almost the same thing, but really done possibly a bit more open. Is there any other big differences? Because there's a lot of standard devices like temperature and pressure controllers, then, based on those. So the question is, there was another protocol the gentleman was aware of a number of years ago. So a number of years ago, 15 years ago, Fieldbus, did you describe it as? So, okay. First admission is that I'm not familiar with every single other protocol out there, so difficult for me to compare. This is a particular one, which has been used by a number of companies and implemented on a number of devices now. So there's a company called EuroTech that sell devices. I had a picture of a random blue box on one of my slides earlier on, which I didn't really mention. I just let it sit there. So they sell boxes similar to this one, which let you plug in lots of, you know, in the field devices and sensors, and then they run MQTT and the broker on those boxes. Yeah, I mean, it's a standards play. It's being more widely adopted, I hope. I believe that you're always going to see vendors who have their own protocols, especially where it's unique to their kind of domain or network. The idea here is to be able to take those at the edges of the network and bring them together. I can't comment on the individual differences, I'm afraid. Number one, are your slides going to be up somewhere? They will. I believe that they'll all be off of the LCA site and I'll put them on slides here myself. Awesome. And number two, are there any public MQTT servers that I could connect to to play around with? Are there any public MQTT servers? Come and have a chat with me. I don't really wish to broadcast the name and address of one, but we might be able to sort one out for you. But it's really easy to download one of those implementations I mentioned and just run it on your laptop. It's not like a huge overhead at all. It just sits there and doesn't... Anyone else? Andy, that was excellent. Thank you very much. Don't forget to drink plenty of water while you're here in Queensland. It's all clean. It's a beer. Clean as well. This is a macadamia nut bowl. When you take it back to the UK, it's been made from Queensland nut shells. They've been ground up really fine and put into a mold and cast as a... It's a real memento from Queensland. The factory making these went underwater in the flood and they were actually making it while they were finishing them off while they were pumping the place out. For your visit from the UK to here, it's got particularly special significance. Thank you very much. Thank you very much indeed for your talk.