Do you think cutting heads off is okay? It doesn't matter what I think, I think it is okay. Why? Because it is, that's it. Okay, so we've got, that's Melbourne City there. We're going to South Melbourne to the supermarket there and we're going to go talk to the public about what we just saw at the gas chambers over there at Diamond Valley Port, so let's do it. Yeah, so we've just been to a slaughterhouse to see the pigs being, you know, go to their death for an unjustifiable reason when we have options like this. You know, just the burrito, some beans and rice, a bit of vegan chicken.  What's the big deal? Why would you fund the horrific cruelty and abuse of animals when you can just have this? We're out here in front of Coles and South Melbourne and we've got some independent animal rights activists here showing people, as they're walking into the supermarket, you know, what happens to animals so they can eat their body parts and buy products and milk and eggs and stuff. Supermarket's where it all goes down. It's just where consumers either choose to be cruel or can choose to liberate animals from, you know, their exploitation. I remember the vegan easy booklets. That's what we first used to hand out back in the days when I first started. Thank you for getting us this way. What's with the animal abuse justification, mate? We're the dominant species. I'll throw you in the ocean with a shark. I've actually said that in a debate about being the apex predator. And I've said, we'll throw you in the ocean with a shark and see how much of an apex predator you are. So he basically used my line of... He basically answered his own justification with a vegan response in one sentence, didn't he?  His son looked at the screen there. I said, that's what happens to animals so we can eat their body parts. And he kind of looked over at his son, like, yep, yep. Mate, are you going to tell them mate, or do we have to? Yeah. Security's here. Do you guys have permission from the centre management to put the stuff here? Yeah, we're allowed to do it. Yeah, it's public land here. No, it's in front of the private property, mate. It's in front, but this is public land here. Okay. Yeah. How long are you guys going to be here? Till the world goes vegan. We wouldn't be here if people weren't buying animal products. Gas chambering pigs. That's why we're here. We'll just have the gas chambers in Diamond Valley pork at Leviton in Victoria here. We don't want people to buy this. Yeah. So when people stop buying these products and stop putting animals in these places, we won't be here. We'll do something else for a job. We're going to stop buying in a couple of hours or a few hours. Well, maybe you might. I don't... You don't need animals? I'm a vegan, mate.  Vegetarian, not a vegan. Why don't you call me one? I'll bet Sharon's not vegan, but... They're trying to escape, aren't they? They're trying to escape. Be vegan. It's much better. What's your opinion? What's your opinion about this? It doesn't matter what's opinion or not. It's violent. It's violent or not violent. Is it cruel? I think it is. And maybe I think it's not. This is good? It doesn't matter. I'm Jewish, so I'm not eating that bad. What do you eat? Kosher? Yes.  Evil. It's evil. You think he's evil? I don't. From the animal's perspective, it's evil. So it's okay, though.  You think cutting heads off is okay? Why? Because it is. That's it.    It's much better for the animals. I don't want to. Why not? Because I don't want to. So you're choosing to be cruel? Well, I'm choosing to be cruel. You're choosing to be cruel to animals? For no reason. If you can live with that, you can live with that. It's horrible. The lady was, like, disgruntled about this, disgruntled with one comment. Like, why isn't she more disgruntled about the screen than be disgruntled with us? You know, why isn't she upset about that, what they're doing to the animals? For a dinner plate, rather than being disgruntled with us, upset with us, for pointing it out. This is where people get the blame game completely wrong. Instead of blaming themselves, it's easier to just point at the activists and go, you know, you have your opinion, I have mine.  You know? It's completely, what they're trying to do is shift the blame. Blame shifting. She's showing her daughter, look. She's a good parent. Not hiding that from her kid. She's an honest parent. This is just an Australian meat industry. Yeah, that's what I'm saying.  Yeah, that's why, because I'm fully a vegetarian myself. Vegetarian. And I love animals. When you love someone, you cannot kill. Yeah. So that's why I'm against with that who is killing the hum that animals. I'm really upset myself and hurting myself. Yeah. So all the paneer, yogurt, dairy, cheese, producing the cows that produce the milk for this, they all go to this slaughterhouse to be killed. I'm just really sad and really, I'm really, it's really hard to myself. Yeah. Thank you guys, I really love you guys. Thank you very much. You're doing a good job, brother. Thanks, brother. You try the vegan alternatives for the dairy products, instead of the milk from the cows, they get slaughtered, instead of the eggs, try the plant-based, you know. I really love you guys. Thank you very much. Thanks, brother. Love you too, mate. It's only been a few hundred people come past already. It's like they're in a vortex of vegan activists and they have to walk through it. Like there's only one way and it's through us.  Well, what do they do worse than stab animals in the throat for burger? But they do it in China, man. I'm a vegetarian, don't start. They murder animals for dairy, too. You know that, eh?  What, here in Australia? No, in China. No, I'm talking about here in Australia. There's slaughterhouses for animals, not for humans. I know, man. So you tell me it's worth? There's a lot of better activism to do. Why? Why? You've got rights here. What about things? You've got rights here. Do animals have rights here?  I don't eat animal products.  They get exploited and killed for dairy and eggs, too. Oh, man, I don't drink milk either, bro. I'm basically a vegan. You're basically a vegan. Yeah. Okay, then why do you oppose us speaking up for the animals? I don't. Then why are you opposing?  Humans got rights here. Oh, yeah. Humans, are you suffering? Are you suffering here? I'm always suffering. You're looked after. I'm always suffering. If he was on a slaughterhouse truck, I'd be speaking up for him as well. Like, when people say they're vegetarian, sometimes I don't really feel that they're being honest, usually. But they could be. They could well and truly be a vegetarian. Sometimes I feel like it's just a way of, like, avoiding the chat about animal rights. But obviously, vegetarians sometimes feel that they're in this comfort zone of they're doing enough. So then when we start pointing out the eggs in the dairy that they're still attached to, they'll have the exact same defensive response as someone who doesn't want to let go of meat. Sometimes vegetarians are actually harder because they're in more of a comfort zone. They feel like, you know, lead me alone, at least I'm doing this. But most of the horrific cruelty and violence and murder happens in the eggs and dairy industry anyway. It's just like, you can't oppose one and not oppose the others. Which makes no sense. Because all you're doing is you're displacing the flesh for eggs and dairy, which is... No, it's fine. It's a product of exactly the same thing in every way. Or the organiser. Not really crazy. Yeah, okay. Was that the five-day vigil? No, I worked... I think I worked at some of the five-day one, which was during the day. Yeah. Were you there for that? I do recall one point that was when the owner of that business started cooking your barbecue. Were you there on that day? I wasn't there on that day. I was on there the fourth or fifth day. Okay. Apparently, a lot of the policemen were affected by that day because they had to spend a lot of time at the slaughterhouse. Oh, I thought it would be a different one. Certainly, when I was there, there weren't any... Do you mean affected as in seeing the pigs or the trucks? Yeah, because I was there for like... A lot of the police were there for five days in a row, seeing 20 trucks full of pigs and smelling the feces and hearing the pigs screaming. I was going to record it, which gate the trucks got brought in. Have you seen from inside there? Oh, God. This is actually inside the chamber in Labyrinthine. Yeah. Have you seen that? No, I'm not interested in that. No, really? I was wondering why you're not interested in seeing the pigs slaughter if you eat them. I'm not here to engage in a conversation about what you're protesting about. I'm here to make sure... I mean, like, in terms of, like, a consumer of pork products. So, again, we're getting around in circles. I'm not here to engage in a conversation about what you're protesting about. Yeah. I'm not. Engage in that conversation. Yeah, yeah. All right. It's just interesting how you're not interested where the food comes from, though, if you put it in your mouth. You know what I mean? And I know you don't have to respond, but it's just... I'd be interested in where my food comes from. And if they'd say they don't want to engage with you about a conversation, are you still trying to force that conversation with people? That's when we might have issues with people. No, not at all. Not at all. Not forcing anything. No, it's just... I was just wondering. Because some police do engage in it. It's just a personal idea of, like... No, so, again... Yeah. It's going round the circle. Like, I'm not being aggressive or forcing anything. I just thought, you know... Because you've been to the slaughterhouse before and a lot of people, police were affected by it. Again, we're going round the circles. I told you I'm not going to engage in it. Yeah, okay. But we don't have to, yeah. Just checking. I was just double-checking. And triple-checking and quadruple-checking and however many times do you want to... Because sometimes they do twice and then they go, oh, yeah, actually, you know. No hard feelings, Matt. No, that's all right. Just giving a try. I understand that you are here and you've got, you know, you have an interest in whatever the topic is, specifically. Animals being murdered for food, yeah. Horrible. That's your thing. That's entirely your right to be here protesting about that. Yeah. And I wouldn't say that I'm an aggressive protester right now or in your face and just having a discussion. But if people don't want to engage with you... They can walk away and just say, no, thank you, mate. See you later. And I'll go, okay, no worries. But then, what I'm saying is you're not willing to respect them saying they have to walk away from you? They're just standing here and they're walking past. I'm not going to chase them down the road or anything, you know. Then they'll be harassment or something like that. No, that's what I swear I'm going with. You just keep asking the same question. I get concerned if people are ringing out triple O when I'm not here, saying that people are getting up in their faces. They're at the police station that is quite literally two-optimated off that way.  We could say, hey, there's some animals being abused down the road at Laverton. Can you help us out? If you want, you can ring triple O with that job if that's what you want to do. It's all legally sanctioned, isn't it? So you'd be on the team of the... You'd just be doing your job protecting the corporation like you have to, so... You wouldn't have any personal power over that. So, yeah, it's kind of upsetting that, you know, pigs suffer and die in a gas chamber and we're getting kind of getting policed about talking to people about it, but we're not really committing the violence, you know. We're just trying to talk to people about it. Nothing ends on the matter. Ah, I understand. He was interested. He just didn't want to engage. Yeah. Maybe, you know what I reckon? Usually police officers always watch it. I think that he was too, like, emotional to watch it or he didn't want to become emotional. He seemed like a really... a guy who really has this real big shield over him. Like this peppy positive attitude, da-da-da-da-da. But then confronting with something like that, I don't think he would do very well confronting his emotion like that. You're not trying to offend me. What you're trying to do is engage people with a conversation. I understand. I'm really interested in your perspective, that's all. I know. As I've explained... I know. I've heard it multiple times. How long did your screen last for? Three hours. I think they said about an hour. I've got a good battery on it. Is it like a caravan that runs on a 12-volt? You respect your rights. I appreciate that. It's good living in a democracy. Certainly. That's the joys of it. Enjoy your afternoon. Thank you. But you know what I found funny is that he would ask us technical things about the TV. Which is engaging. But he won't engage in the topic of the animals on the screen. But it'll engage in the screen. Which is interesting because he was engaging. So he contradicts himself there. Either don't engage at all. But he's picking and choosing what he will engage in. True. However someone reacts, you cannot dictate what they're going to do in the coming months. You know? I think a reaction is better than no reaction. For sure. A positive reaction doesn't even mean they're going to change. They could just be telling you what you want to hear. It's really hard to gauge. But stopping and having a debate usually is a good sign. Because we win the debate.


Paul Mason says Bellingcat launders information for Western intelligence. The Grey Zone has published leaked email communications between faux-left British commentator and aspiring parliamentarian Paul Mason and a shady intelligence contractor named Amil Khan, which plainly shows the two plotting to use state power to subvert anti-imperialist media outlets like Consortium News and Grey Zone, as well as far-left rogue academics and the broader left more generally. Mason has obliquely authenticated the contents of the emails with a weird rambling medium post claiming to have been victimized by a Russian hack and leak operation. The post does not deny the veracity of the emails. Instead, Mason bizarrely claims that they may be altered or faked, as though they are not his own personal communications whose accuracy he could instantly deny if they were altered or faked in any way. This is the same as verifying the emails and then yelling, but look over there! It's Putin! It would take a very silly person indeed to look at a bunch of authenticated emails showing a major British media figure conspiring with an intelligence contractor to subvert the anti-war left and then conclude that the correct response to this would be to get angry at the Russians. There will probably be a lot written about these leaks in the coming days, but for now I'd like to focus on the fact that in these private communications between a media insider and an intelligence insider, the independent investigative journalism outlet known as Bellingcat is described as a proxy for Western intelligence agencies and is said to receive a steady stream of intel from them. Just as Bellingcat get a steady stream of intel from Western agencies, I suspect the attacks on you and others are fed by Russian and Chinese intel, Mason is seen telling Khan, who has been the subject of a previous Greyzone exposé. On the team of spin-meisters Mason and Khan were plotting to assemble to undermine anti-imperialist media, Mason said that what it really also needs is intel service by proxy, e.g. Bellingcat, which certainly reads like an explicit call to work with Western intelligence agencies to take down his perceived enemies on the left. Khan, a longtime advocate and associate of Bellingcat, did not once challenge Mason's repeated characterization of the supposed citizen journalist collective as a clearinghouse for friendly spy agencies, write Greyzone's Kit Klarenberg and Max Blumenthal. As of this writing, there has been little in the way of denial from Bellingcat of those claims in the closet CIA fan Paul Mason made when he believed he was communicating in privacy and safety. The Twitter page of its executive director and founder, Elliot Higgins, tweeted, I see the Greyzone has acquired even more hacked emails. I wonder who keeps providing them with those. Hmm. When asked by a commenter if intelligence agencies leak information to Bellingcat, Higgins replied no and never, which he then immediately retreated from when pressed, saying instead, well, if we use sources that aren't open sources, we'll use multiple independent sources to acquire the same or related data and triangulate the data to confirm its authenticity, which is a mighty long pace from no and never if you look at it. It's saying, well, if we do get information from someone who might work for an intelligence agency, we'll use related data from other sources who themselves may or may not also have intelligence ties to confirm it. People would be well advised to take anything Higgins says about his operation with a grain of salt. In 2016, he dismissed the suggestion that his operation is funded by the CIA cutout known as the National Endowment for Democracy, NED, with a stop-reading conspiracy websites. Less than a year later, he admitted when pressed that Bellingcat does indeed receive funding from NED. This is not the first time it has been claimed that Bellingcat operates as a proxy for Western intelligence information laundering, nor the second, nor the third. As Alan McLeod documented last year from Mint Press News, there was already a mountain of evidence that the independent narrative management firm celebrated and beloved by the Western political media class operates as a proxy of the Western intelligence cartel. Mason and Kahn's communications are just one more piece on that pile. Western intelligence agencies have numerous pathways through which they can get information, misinformation, and disinformation into the mainstream press without people noticing that the news media are publishing government propaganda. Mason's emails are yet more evidence that Bellingcat is one such pipeline for intelligence cartel PSYOPs. If there's something the cartel wants published, they launder it through proxies like Bellingcat and then the news media run it, saying it's been verified by an independent OSINT service. And Presto, you've got yourself some good old-fashioned, Langley-cooked spook propaganda. This doesn't mean that everything Bellingcat publishes is entirely false. The best propaganda is generally a mixture of truth with half-truth distortion, lies by omission, and the removal of context and perspective. It just means it's generally untrustworthy, because it operates at the direction, knowingly or unknowingly, of sociopathic government agencies whose only interest is in domination and control. If the term information laundering sounds familiar to you, it might be because you heard it in the news like during the George W. Bush administration when Dick Cheney's Inner Circle was leaking false claims about Iraq to the New York Times, verifying that information when contacted to confirm it, and then citing those false news reports when continuing to make the case for invasion. The term might also sound familiar to you, because information laundering was the subject of the much ridiculed Mary Poppins jingle sung by notorious Imperial narrative manager Nina Jankovic, who also featured in the Grey Zone report. Apparently, Mason contacted Kahn in outrage over a consortium news piece disputing the official Imperial Ukraine narrative and Kahn reached out to Jankovic for advice on what to do. Jankovic told Kahn that consortium news was a case of useful idiots rather than funding, meaning it's not paid by the Kremlin, it just publishes things that Empire managers don't like. Kahn then told Mason that there was a highly suspicious gap in consortium news publications between 2005 and 2011, which consortium editor Joe Lauria explained in the Grey Zone piece was apparently the result of Kahn not doing basic fact-checking and not understanding how the internet works. Lovely. Sing it with me now.


Thank you. Well, we're all terrified now. Thank you to both Rebecca and Taylor for inviting me to do this tonight.  But in the first phase of this, I'm going to bore you to death in anticipation of what we're going to do later with the Nerf Canon, which I promise you may be life-threatening, at least eye-threatening, and fun because I'm going to have you running around the room. All right? So the first thing we're going to do tonight, and hopefully this will only take about 10 minutes, is we're going to talk a little bit about what does it actually mean to see the universe? What is really going on when you observe the universe around you? The next little phase of this that riffs off of the first one is that I want you to walk away tonight. If you're going to remember one thing besides, oh my God, oh my God, he put my eye out with that Nerf Canon, I want you to remember that everything is waves. If you thought that waves were just something that water did, or that air did, or that light does, if you already know that light is a wave, and we'll play with that a little bit tonight, I want you to walk away, at least with the basic idea, that it's not limited only to those things. And in fact, I'll show you some pictures tonight to convince you of the first steps toward understanding that fact. Then we're going to bust out the Nerf Canon, and we're going to start to think about what it means to see something that your eyes really have no hope of ever actually seeing. And we'll cover why that's the case in the first part here. And then at the end, I hope to share with you a tiny glimpse of the subatomic world. And that will involve, I think, people at the end cycling up and having a look in this black box that I have here up on the counter. So let's begin with what it means to see the universe. So let's just open this up. What do you think it means to see? What is seeing? Anderson, you're reliable. Yes, go ahead. Yeah, some dude who's talking at me right now. Yeah, no, that's a pretty good modern understanding of what seeing is. So to reiterate that, light is coming to our eyes. Our eyes are the organ in our body that converts the light into a chemical and electrical signal. The wet wear in our head is able to learn over a short period of time how to interpret those signals and reconstruct a three dimensional representation of the world around us using light. There are other ways we experience the world. There's touch, which is also electrical in nature. There's sound. And that's another way of converting a wave into an experience that the brain can interpret. We have a whole bunch of these senses, taste, smell or the other ones that we're all familiar with. So indeed, what does it mean to see the universe? Well, I like these photos. These are two of these are astronomy pictures of the day. And if you have never visited the APOD or astronomy picture of the day archive, I highly encourage you to bookmark it or get the mailing that's sent every day. You'll get amazing pictures in your inbox, in your Twitter feed, whatever. They have multiple ways of getting this stuff every day. And these are just two of them. And I picked these because they combine both the terrestrial and our local galactic neighborhood. So this is a beautiful waterfall captured at night. And then this is part of our Milky Way galaxy, our home galaxy, where one star among about half a trillion stars that make up this collection of stars. This is another collection of stars far from ours. This is, I forget exactly how far it's several hundred, several million light years away. That is, it takes the light from that object up there a few million years to get to Earth. We're not seeing that object as it exists now. We're seeing that object as it existed when the light left it, which is about two and a half million years ago. So think about what life on this planet was like two and a half million years ago. We're only seeing that thing as it looked then, now in that picture. This one's nice because it's got a person in it. So this is looking over a valley in Switzerland. And I work on an experiment in Switzerland, which is why I picked this. And again, you've got a meteorite here. You've got the Milky Way. It's got everything. It's got human light sources. So how do we see, well, we rely on light doing one of two things, either going straight from something that's emitting light, and that light strikes our eyes, or light coming from another source like the the bulbs in this room bouncing off of things in the room and then coming to our eye. And we're able to interpret all of that using our brains. So here's light reflecting off of things during the day in downtown Dallas. So at night, of course, this would be all lit up, like this valley is all lit up, and then there'd be sources of light for us to see. So Anderson captured it. This is the cartoon that kind of repeats what he says. Matter either scatters or emits light. Light, it turns out, is a wave. That was a hard fought thing. It took a long time to sort that out. And then there was lots of debate even once the evidence was in. And then it gets to our eyes and our eyes have a whole bunch of biological capabilities to focus the light and convert the light to other forms of energy that can be transmitted to, for instance, our brain. But one question you might ask yourself is, okay, cool, this eye, the eye is amazing, right?  All right. But the eye is very limited for a variety of reasons. But one of them is that it just can't see all the kinds of light that exist in the universe, right? So the question of is there a limit to what humans can see, what you can see, what I can see is sort of a two-fold thing. If we had perfect optical systems, perfect lenses, really powerful magnification capabilities in our eyes to take, collect lots of light and feed it into our retinas, under those ideal conditions, is there anything we couldn't see? And the answer is, yeah, there's a lot we can't see. All right. So here are some rules of thumb for observing things with light. So first of all, because light is a wave, and I'll show you a movie in a second that will drive this home a little bit, that wave has to have certain properties in order for you to actually get information from the thing it's either emitted from or more importantly, scattered off of. So for instance, as a rule of thumb, the length of the wave that makes up a kind of light, roughly speaking, tells you the scale of sizes you can see. All right. So I'll come back to that idea in a moment, but basically any object that's smaller than the wavelength, the typical repetitive dimension of a light wave, anything that's smaller than that just doesn't affect the wave in a way that allows you to get information about the object. And that means you may be able to observe the light, but it's not going to tell you anything about what you're seeing. It's not scattering off of the object in a way that will give you any useful information. So what are some typical wavelengths of light? So a wavelength is, for instance, the distance from the crest of one light wave to the neighboring crest. So if you think of a wave as a regular undulating pattern like this, go from the tippy top to the tippy top of the next crest, and that's the wavelength of light. Red light, which is the longest wavelength we can see, has a length of about 750 billionths of a meter or 750 nanometers. The shortest wavelengths we can see are violet. So when you see something that's a deep purple color, it's right on the edge of the eye's ability to actually see anything. The eye is not really sensitive to any waves longer than this or shorter than this. So infrared, which is what's used in many TV remote controls to control the television set or other remote control things like that, that's just outside of our visible range. How many of you have mobile phones? Okay, and how many of you have cameras on your mobile phones? So here's a fun experiment you can do tonight. Find an infrared remote control in your house, all right? So take it and aim it at the camera and then start recording or just look through the, look at the screen at the image that's being shown. Push a button on the remote control and you'll see the sort of sickly green thing light up in the end of the remote. So cameras, it turns out are slightly sensitive to the infrared and they'll convert that infrared to a different color in the screen. And this is why you have to do all this color correction in mobile phone photography. In fact, any photograph taken with a CCD camera has this problem and has to be color corrected so that it doesn't get these funny greens in it that come from infrared. All right, so you can kind of see infrared with some help. And that's another theme of tonight.  And we need that. Okay, so the smallest thing that we can actually see using the light that our eyes are directly sensitive to is of a size of about 350 nanometers. Now just off the top of your head, does anybody know the sizes of things like cells, plant cells, animal cells, cell membranes, things like that? Anderson? Yeah. Okay, so that we could probably see with visible light, right? Yeah. What about things in a cell like organelles in a cell or the cell membrane? Does anyone know what the cell membranes thickness is? Somebody other than Anderson? I should we should have done the bingo card tonight. No? Yeah. Yeah, exactly. It's about that order of magnitude. It varies on the cell type. But yeah, three ish 10 ish nanometers, something like that. Yep, perfect. So that the cell membrane, you're just not going to see directly unaided without some other kind of instrumentation that is probing smaller distances. So I did this, I filmed this earlier today just to show you this is a beaker floating in a bath of water. This little video will repeat. So I set it up so that the beaker had some water in it and it was it's top was sitting very close to the level of the water, which is there. And I sent two waves in which had roughly the same energy in them. And don't ask how I guaranteed that it took me a little bit to get that all worked out. But basically, I used a ruler to push the water from one side and I either did a short sharp shock or a long shock over a bigger distance. The long shock over a bigger distance gives a big wave and you'll see when this goes back and cycles through again, it's about 20 seconds long. So the water's flat here, you'll see this big rise come through and the the length of the rise from one crest to the next is way wider than the beaker and the beaker just kind of rides it just surfs it. Not very exciting. Over here, the short sharp shock, however, nearly knocks the beaker all the way over. And this is just to illustrate to you the difference between seeing things with a wavelength that's too big, in which case you're just kind of jostling around things like atoms or hitting those small things with something of comparable size. And here I contrived the wave to be roughly the same width as the beaker. So it doesn't completely knock it over, but it really upsets the beaker on the right hand side far more than on the left. So watch the short wave coming in. It's right here. So that thing's about the same width as the beaker. And it really slams into it. I mean, look what it does to that thing. Okay. So that's observing with a short wavelength phenomenon and that's observing with a long wavelength phenomenon. You can't learn much about the beaker from the long wave. But from the short wave, all kinds of interesting things can happen to the short wave phenomenon. So you need small things to see small things. So here's some scales that you may be familiar with. All right, so a human hair is about 100 millions of a meter in thickness 100 microns. By the time you get down to roughly 10 microns, we're talking about the sizes of chromosomes, bacteria, animal cells and so forth, it spans a space. genes themselves are down here between one micron and 100 nanometers. And then we're getting down to you know, specific proteins, antibodies, viruses and things like that in the 10 nanometer range. And then down here around 0.1 nanometer, we're approaching the atomic scale. Alright, so 10.1 nanometers or so 10 to the minus 10 meters, and you're roughly at the size of atoms. There's no way we're going to see atoms if we can't see cell membranes with visible light. So how are we going to probe atoms and even more interestingly, how are we going to probe things that are smaller than atoms? Yeah, Anderson. Yep. Boy, spoiler alert on this kid. I tell you, all right. First, though, why don't we just make some smaller light waves, right? There's all kinds of light waves we could play with, we could do UV. Alright, UV is is capable of tearing electrons off of molecules and biological systems. It's why it can induce cancers. x rays, right, you're not supposed to get a lot of those, but they're great for imaging the body, they penetrate things and they scatter off of bones, and they're good for doing things like dental dental imaging and so forth. gamma rays, right, you definitely don't want to get exposed to too much of that because that'll take your electrons for a ride and never return them, which is not so good for DNA. But hey, it's got a really short wavelength. Alright, so human eyes are only sensitive to a small fraction of all possible light waves. We know that, right? So why not use these other things? Well, sure, we could do that. But it does come at this cost.  But the shorter the wavelength, the higher the energy of the light wave and the more energy that light wave carry, the more damage it does when it interacts with something. So yeah, I mean, sure, we can we can send a bullet at something to probe its size, but it might also do significant damage on its way through. And if you want to think about this, the x rays and gamma rays, they're the high speed bullets of the of the imaging world, you can use them. It can make it can cost tremendous energy to make them in any level of intensity. And I'll show you one of these facilities in a minute. But it does tremendous damage to the sample. So you're limited in what you can actually see with these things. Alright, so let me just show you a couple of things here. So some very famous techniques for seeing very small things or things like x ray crystallography. If you can get a sample and crystalline form and put it in an x ray beam, you can do imaging of it. And so one of the most famous examples of this is a picture I'll show you in a minute.  And if anything's rattling around inside of them. Alright, those things are only one times 10 to the or about one times 10 to the minus 15 meters in size or one femtometer. Alright, so if you didn't know that unit before tonight femtometer 10 to the minus 15 meter, these are 10s of 1000s of times smaller than the atom itself, or their abouts. Well, millions of times smaller than the atom itself. Alright, so this is one of the most famous x ray images that was ever taken. And this is a whole story in and of itself, you can get a historian of science to tell you about this. This is a chemist and x ray crystallographer Rosalind Franklin, who was the very first person to actually take an x ray crystallographic image of what became known as the double helix structure of DNA. So this is in fact the image that revealed that it's this double helix intertwined structure. It was taken by her and a colleague, R.G. Gosling. Without her knowledge, Gosling showed it to Crick and Watson, and it was Crick, Watson and Gosling who got the Nobel Prize for this, not not Rosalind. Yeah, she was passed over, she died at about age 38. So since they don't do the Nobel posthumously, she was never really honored for this work. It's only really rather recently that this has come to light. Okay, but that funny image there, which was taken with x rays has a lot of information packed into it. And if you know how to read that information, you can figure out that DNA has this double helix structure that that is so common now that we all learn about. But nobody knew that before her. You want a modern x ray facility to do industrial, biological and chemical work. This is one of them. There's only a few of these in the world. This is known as an x ray free electron laser. It is two kilometers long. It gets a whole bunch of electrons up to really high speed and then it wiggles them. And it turns out when you wiggle electrons, they emit light. And if you wiggle them really fast at high speed, they emit x rays. And in fact, if you wiggle them all at the same time, you get an x ray laser out of this. So the laser beam comes down this long beam line here to several facilities with research capabilities. There's various experimental halls. The experiment where I got my PhD used to be right there, but it's all gone now. All of this replaced the old particle physics facilities that are here at this lab. This is the Slack National Accelerator Laboratory, one of about a dozen or so federally funded basic research laboratories in the United States. Its primary mission now is light source science. So it serves academia and industry. They've done all kinds of fascinating things with this. And there's this goal of doing something known as femtosecond chemistry, where they do x ray images x ray movies of chemical reactions happening in real time. And those processes happen on the scale of femtoseconds 10 of the minus 15 seconds. So lots of facilities are racing to try to see that for the first time. But this is huge, right? Three kilometers from the end to end, only about two of it are being used right now. The upgrade will use that remaining kilometer of capability back there. Why does light get to have all the fun? Okay, why does light get to have all the fun? And in fact, Louis de Broglie for his thesis work back in 1924 thereabouts 1920, 1924, made a postulate. If if lights having all the fun of being a wave, and having energy and momentum which are particle like properties. So if light can be wave like, but also when it's short enough in wavelength crash into things as if it's a particle, why does matter have to then be confined to only have particle like nature to it. So he postulated that if lights a wave, why not also matter? So let's look at light waves. I promise you these are the only equations I have in here tonight. Alright, there are some really easy equations. If you want to know the energy of a light wave, you just need to take a well defined physical constant and multiply it by the frequency of the wave. That's the rate at which crests of the wave pass you in time. Okay, so the equation is simple e equals hf and h is that constant. I'll come back to that in a second. If you want to know the momentum of that wave, you just take the constant and you divide it by the wavelength. That's not so bad. So if you know the wavelength but you don't know the frequency, no problem, you can get the momentum of that wave and you can figure out other things from it. So the equation for that would be p equals h the constant over this funny letter. It's Greek lowercase lambda. Okay, for wavelength. That constant is Planck's constant, one of the most fundamental constants in the universe. It essentially tells you what the smallest amount of momentum is in the universe. And it's got these units. So the number is 6.626 times 10 to the minus 34 kilogram meters per second, worst units in the world. This is a bit more approachable. 4.136 times 10 to the minus 15 electron volt seconds for the chemists in the audience. If you prefer electron volts, as a particle physicist, I prefer electron volts. So that one works for me. So de Broglie's hypothesis was why does light get to have all the fun? So he made a postulate. Why aren't there matter waves? Why can't matter behave like a wave too? And so he said, if that's true, we should expect the wave like properties to be related to the momentum of a particle. Momentum is a particle property. So he just imposed this.  And it turned out he was right. So if you take light waves, for instance, and make them do the things that waves do, and Taylor, I'll need your help with this one. Okay, then you can have all kinds of fun with this stuff. So let me show you a wave behavior that light does. And then I'm going to show you some pictures and we'll take a look at that. All right.  And what I'm going to do is I've turned a laser on here. It's a red, red visible light laser beam. And we're going to zoom in over here. That's the dot from the laser beam. Okay, so I've just zoomed in with the camera here on the little spot that the laser beam is making on the wall. Alright, so it's this rather intense but fuzzy circular beam. Okay, nothing particularly exciting going on. But because light is a wave, it does the things that waves do. So if you imagine a whole bunch of waves coming in toward the shore on a lake like on the Great Lakes or in the ocean, and then imagine that there's a rock wall between the waves and the beach. And that rock wall has a little hole in it. The waves that pass through that hole will start to spread out and they'll start to overlap with each other. And wherever the crests are lie on top of each other, the waves will get taller. And wherever the troughs overlap with each other, the waves will get lower. And if crests overlap with troughs, the waves will cancel out. This is something known as interference. And an interference pattern is a pattern of intense, bright things, tall things and dark places where there's no wave at all. And so if we kill the lights here, I'll show you an interference pattern. I'm going to make this light pass through a hole in a breakwall. This is just a little slit in a piece of material. And when you do this, what do you see? You see a pattern of light and dark spots. Let's see if I can stop shaking. So where there was a spot before, all right, bright spots and dark spots. All right, do lights again. Cool. So let me set this back here. All right, so that's one of the things that waves can do. And so let me show you some pictures. So again, here are some bright spots and some dark spots. These are images that are taken of waves interfering with themselves as they are forced to scatter through some kind of structure. Sometimes the wave peaks add up, and sometimes the peaks and the troughs intersect, and then they cancel each other out. So the bright spots are where they add up. And the dark spots, the dark gaps in between are where they cancel each other out. One of these is the interference pattern from a laser beam. And one of these is the interference pattern an electron wave makes with itself. One of these is a matter wave interference. One of these is a light wave interference. Which one do you think is which? Yeah. All right, so laser electron. Okay, turns out it's the other way around. So that's the electron beam interfering with itself, single beam going through a crystal structure, it can scatter off two places in the crystal structure. And depending on how shifted the scattered bait beams are, they interfere and give you light spots and light spots and dark spots, where it places where there are electrons, places where there are not electrons, as if they canceled each other out. That one's the red laser beam over there, I made a black and white so that you couldn't tell. It used to be a color image. Okay, hard to tell is the point, right? Because they're both wave like things, and they exhibit wave like behaviors. Okay, so for example, just to give you some some some feel for this, an electron in a very common instrument, a transmission electron microscope or TEM may be accelerated through a 10 like kilovolt electric potential to get the electrons in the beam up to speed. So that that gives the electrons about 10 kilo electron volts of energy kinetic energy due to that acceleration. And if you run that through the de Broglie wavelength calculation, it turns out those electrons have a wavelength of 0.015 nanometers 0.015 nanometers. Now that is absolutely small enough to see for instance the cell membrane. If you use that to make an image of a cell, you'd see much more structure in the cell. Now compare that to x rays at the same energy, which are light waves, they only have a wavelength of 0.2 nanometers. So if you had two equally, you know, energy costing ways of making waves, the electrons win over the x rays hands down, no problem. And it's much easier to make transport and accelerate electrons than it is to control x rays x ray optics are insanely difficult to do because they blast through conventional mirrors. So how do you focus an x ray beam when it rips your mirrors apart? There's a whole engineering art to that. And it's still not perfect. It's much more fun and productive to work with particles that can be more easily controlled. Okay. Now those electrons that I showed you before from the Linux Coherent Light Source, the big x ray laser, those have even smaller wavelengths. So if you in the old days before the Slack National Accelerator Lab was a light source facility, it actually took those electrons and smashed them into things to see what was going on inside those things. And you know, in the old days back in the 1960s when this facility first came into existence, the typical beam energy was about, you know, 10 billion electron volts. And if you run that through the de Broglie wavelength calculation, you find out that that corresponds to a size of point 000012 nanometers or about 1.2 femtometers in size. Now that is approaching the scale of the nucleus of the atom. And in fact, this is how we figured out what the structure of the nucleus of the atom is. What is it that's rattling around inside the nucleus?  Or is there something else going on in there that's more complicated? And so these experiments were done in the 60s and 70s and definitively revealed the character of the proton and the neutron. And to this day, we're still reeling from that discovery, we're still trying to make sense of what's going on down there. So this is just to show you the kinds of things you can do with matter waves. So this is an image of a very close up of a cell membrane here, using a one of these transmission electron microscopes or TEMs. These are things you can in principle buy off the shelf these days and install in a laboratory. So here we have mitochondria, individual mitochondria. Okay, and they're big on this picture. This is roughly a micron scale this black line down here. This is the cell membrane here. And that's about 10 nanometers thick. Alright, so exactly consistent with what we heard earlier, that's about 10 meters on this scale, 10 nanometers on this scale. This is remarkable imaging, you can't really do this with x-rays, you just rip these samples apart, cells are just too sensitive for this kind of exposure to x-rays. Okay, so I think I've repeated myself here. That's what I get for doing cut and paste to write a talk. Oh, yeah, look at that. And we're discovering I'm Oh, wow, so exciting. Either that or time is repeating itself. This is all very fun. Okay. Alright, so let's have some fun. Let's play around with this idea of sending very small wavelength probes at tiny structures and try to understand what it was that Rosalind Franklin was doing and what it is that particle physicists did to understand the structure of the nucleus of atoms. So for this, I'm going to have my helper come on down. This is Abraham. Abraham has never taken one of my classes. Never. But he was a regular visitor to my office to talk about the physics of his special skill set that we'll use today. Okay, so let me get let me get the lights going here. Alright, cool. So he's going to put that face shield on. And what we're going to do is in miniature, we're going to do a scattering experiment. Now, this is the part of the class where one of you is likely to lose an eye. So I apologize in advance. Okay, but I'm sure that the health planet SMU is outstanding. So this is a Nerf gun, about 40 bucks or so on Amazon. And just to give you a sense of how dangerous this is. Okay, so can I have that? Oh, great. Perfect. Look at that. It's like I planned it, right? Like I planned it. Yes. Oh, I'll have to cross off the days since Anderson made a pun in class sign. So Alright, so Abraham's going to hold out this ball. This ball is kind of standing in for a model of the proton or the neutron circa 1940, 1950, something like that. Okay, now here's it before your arms are going to get tired.   So I want a few more people if some people could come from the center section, go over here if the folks in the left section could kind of spread out. Because what I want you to do is I want you to try to catch or mark where the projectiles land when they scatter. And we're going to do this as an experiment and Taylor or Rebecca, if you guys are taking pictures, could you grab some photos of people doing this great. And then similarly here, if we could kind of spread out a little bit. Alright, I should have done like a bingo card for this like will Dr. Sikul a backscatter one of these right in his face, which is a good possibility. Okay, let's hope not but but but but really let's hope so. So Oh, sure. Okay. So now I'm serious, these things bounce really fast.  Alright, so I'm going to fire about 10 of these things at that sphere. And we're going to make a prediction based upon what we see about what scattering off of a proton or a neutron would look like if it was a hard ball. Okay, ready, Abraham in three, two, one. Okay. Exciting, right? Alright, so let's let's find those here. I've got one here. Alright, everyone who's got one of these hold it up. We'll need to know 10 ish people to find them. All right. Okay, great. So you've got three great. You just hold up both hands them. That'll be great. Alright, so let's take a look at the results of this experiment. Right now. So did anybody over did anybody over here catch a nerve bullet? No, okay. So what do we observe about this scattering experiment? What is it like to scatter off of a solid sphere? Yeah, since you have your hand up. But I'm yes. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I'm not going to get through that thing. It's solid, right? So I'm expecting if it really is solid, I'm expecting stuff to bounce off come straight back at me. If I go straight out the ball, I was kind of I did get a few of those, right? They kind of basically came back at me as well as able to get one of these. Right? Nobody over there saw any excitement. All right. Okay, great. So let's pick these up and let's get them out of the field of play. We can you can put them down here on this tray on this cart so that where they're not in play. Geez, tough crowd. Alright, so now this is where Abraham skill set comes in. So Abraham has the ability to juggle. And what he's going to do for us is he's going to create a model of the neutron or a proton that turns out to be much more realistic based on what we now know about scattering electrons off of neutrons and protons. Okay. All right. So whenever you're ready, and then the audience be ready to catch again, because this is coming at you. All right. Good. All right, in three is Chris, I don't know why you're sitting there in three, two, one. We'll give the neutron a chance to reset. Cool. Okay, think we've already got a lot of data here. So a couple of things. Thank you, Abraham. I had round of applause for Abraham on that one. Awesome. Yeah. Well, in fact, it was liquid hydrogen that was used to do these experiments originally because it's a rich source of protons and also deuterated. So deuterated water was used as well. So you can attach a neutron to those protons. Alright, so most of the bullets went straight through but a couple of them winged off of the balls as he juggled them, right? So there's structure in there. But it's possible that you can go straight through it and not hit any of the things that are inside of it. And yet, when he was juggling, the volume of the space he was taking up was roughly the same size as that moon globe he was holding before. All right. And the pattern is very different. Right. Most of the bullets went straight through a few of them winged off at funny angles as they smacked into the stuff inside of our little model proton or neutron. This is the kind of pattern that emerged from using these scattering experiments in the 1960s and 70s. So alright, Abraham, you're all set. Thank you very much. Yep. Awesome. Okay, great. I shouldn't aim that at you. So what's remarkable about all of this is that by playing around with beams of particles scattering off of targets, and then taking different kinds of target structures into account, you can predict, well, what would a solid sphere look like if I were scattering off that? Or what would a perfect point of electric charge look like if I were scattering off that? Or what if it really isn't a perfect point of electric charge? What if it looks from a distance like a point? But as I get closer, it's actually things dancing around bound to each other by another force that also has a total electric charge. And it turns out that's what was really going on. The proton and the neutron are made from these little things called quarks. And the quarks have funny fractions of electric charge because thanks to Ben Franklin, we assign negative charge to go with the electrons now. He didn't know about electrons then that came out later. But what was eventually found to be the fundamental electric charge was associated with the electron. But it turns out there are things in nature that have less electric charge than an electron and they are the quarks. So because we're stuck with this historical feature that we assigned the fundamental electric charge before we discovered the truly fundamental electric charges in nature, the quarks have charges of two thirds and one third, the fundamental electric charge, which is that carried by the electron or the proton. So it takes three quarks to make up a proton, their charges add up to make a positive electric charge. And it takes three different kinds of quarks to add up and make a neutron all of the charges cancel out and the neutron is electrically neutral. And the quark picture took a long time. It took decades to cement. But by the 1980s, it was extremely well established that all the competing hypotheses were dead. And to this day, we're still using the existence of quarks and their cousins like the electron to try to understand the universe at its smallest scale. So the experiment that some of us in the room here work on, the Large Hadron Collider, we're smashing protons together. And it's sort of a funny historical twist. We're now taking these bags of quarks and smashing them into each other and seeing what stuff comes out. By getting protons up to extremely high energies, we're probing even smaller scales than those old experiments did. We're looking at 10 to the minus 18, 10 to the minus 19, 10 to the minus 20, 10 to the minus 21 meters in size. What's down there? And so far, we haven't seen any surprises. It seems to be its quarks and their cousins and no new surprises. But the thing about going into a frontier is you never know what you're going to find when you go there, right?  I don't know if the slides will be available afterward, but I put a link into the Science Magazine article by Michael Reardon, who's a bit of a historian of particle physics. And he talks about the discovery of the quarks, right, which was a very controversial discovery. It was a controversial proposal, and it took, like I said, decades to sort that all out, okay? So what I want to close with tonight, and for this, it's probably going to be best if everybody just kind of comes up here at the end after I wrap up my yammering. I'm going to give you a glimpse of the subatomic. And let me see how this thing's doing. Okay, cool. So let me kill these lights. Actually, we'll do this. We'll see if this works. Okay. So this thing up here, this box, is what's known as a cloud chamber. And what I'm going to do now is show you a video of it, okay? So it's a little hard to see with the glare and so forth, and that's why it'll be best if people just come up here at the end and take a look for themselves. But there's some things I can show you in this. So it'll be more obvious when you get up here, right? But look for little wispy lines in the video, all right? As I'm talking, just look around, pick a place and look. It's like spotting a meteor. Look for a trail that looks like a little comet has passed through the picture. Those aren't comets. Those are actually electrons and what are called alpha particles and the cousins of the electron known as the muon, smashing into alcohol molecules in the vapor in the bottom of the chamber. And these particles all have electric charge. And so when they blast through the alcohol vapor, they suck electrons off of the atoms and the molecules, which then causes the alcohol molecules in the vicinity to suddenly all get kind of yanked into the wake of this ionization that's going on. And so what you'll see are these little lines that zing through the cloud. And those lines are a trail of ionized atoms left over by a particle that's just buzzing around in the room right now. They're doing this all the time, but you can't see them. They're too small. Your eyes can't see these things. But with an instrument, we can reveal that they're just there like little ghosts all the time. So I'm really going to make this thing dance. I have a 40,000 volt power supply and I have this little tube up here. And when I crank this thing on, it's going to make a really strong electric field inside of this chamber and watch what happens to the vapor. Okay? Don't worry about the sound this thing's going to make because it sounds dangerous. Alright? Watch the vapor.  That's what it looks like. We'll let it reset. It's got to reneutralize. It takes a few seconds and then we crank the field up again and they dance for us. So what you're seeing there are the little electrons and those alcohol molecules suddenly getting yanked out of their parent alcohol molecule and then dragged across the vapor by the electric field.  And then you have to wait a moment for it to neutralize and then you can do it again. Okay? So humans have learned over the last century how to make this kind of technology work for us. You'll find this technology in basically every hospital, every major hospital in the nation, using subatomic particles to image the human body non-invasively without having to make a single scalpel mark. You'll also find beams of particles used to treat particularly nasty cancers in places where it's really not safe to operate. So these are so-called proton beam therapies or carbon-ion beam therapies. Particle accelerators are just about everywhere now in medical treatment. And while they still haven't come to their maturity level, they've come a long way and we'll have to kind of see how that all shakes out. Okay? So at this point I'm going to close up my part of the talk and I'm going to invite you all to come on down and stare at the cloud chamber if you like and see if you can spot little particles naturally zinging through it in the room. Thank you very much.


What's going on everyone Sam here with late in sports cards, and I'm ripping 15 Father's Day packs for Martin Z. So good luck Martin. See what we got in here for you, man Got Jean-Marin and Omar Yurt seven He Yeah, I'm very Still don't really understand that one. There's got to be a reason. I just don't know the reason Shohei Otani Joe Burrow LSU Shaq the magic Drake London rookie for USC was everybody. Yeah, how you guys doing? Mookie bets and Kate Cunningham rookie that start talking about food again to get everybody to engage. I Will I'll do it. I don't mind got Damian Lillard base and Julio Rodriguez Rookie got Josh Allen Jalen Green base rookie Rockets nice one there Got Ricardo Pepe rookie blue Charles Barkley 23 out of 50 nice Chuck Around mound of rebound Take that for sure Got Tatis and Say as a zoo key rookie cubs got Spencer Torkelson rookie and John Marant got one Soto Bobby Whit jr. Bobby Whit nice Tom Brady, Michigan. There you go Always take a Brady and We've got foil Jason Tatum to 199 Celtics nice Tatum Ken Griffey jr. And Josh giddy base rookie thunder got Steph Curry and Jason Tatum base Finals matchup right there got Matt Stafford Sam Howell North Carolina and last one here We've got Nikolai Yolkich and Palo Ben caro base rookie Duke That'll do it for your break there Martin congrats on all the cards man. We'll get those all right out to thank you again


We're with the 728 transportation company. Our job out here is to do convoys and provide base security. We're just supporting the other units into the Italian and making sure that they got the supplies they need so that all the missions run smoothly. Soldiers have water, soldiers have food, soldiers have all the ammo they need. Our job is to move equipment from wherever it is to where it needs to be. We ran a convoy yesterday and in that convoy we got all these soldiers used to coming into contact, using the radios, send up reports, identify enemies and their positions and what weapons are using. And this stuff is very important. Hip-Hockey training before you get to AT is definitely crucial. A lot of that comes down to NCOs making a training plan, making sure that these soldiers get trained up and that way when we're out here they know exactly what to do.


Hi, everyone, and welcome to JSA TV and JSA Podcasts where we're covering the latest stories, trends, and innovation from leaders in our industry. And it's PTC 2024. It's January. I'm talking to our friend, Sean Barney, who is Vice President Data Center Strategy at JLL. Always a pleasure. Great to be back here in JSA TV land and with my JSA friends and colleagues and everyone here at PTC at this rock in conference 2024. It is rocking. The energy here is incredible. There's so much going on. It's the running and meeting and talking and collaborating and deal-making that we all know and love. And it feels up leveled this year with the excitement of all this incredible new tech and demand. It's insatiable. Yeah. And we're fortunate to have you joining us because, like you said, there's lots happening outside these doors of this PTC hub that we're currently in. But we're especially excited because you, of course, are a returning author to greener data, greener data. You are also, we were looking, you're listed right here on the first volume that came out a couple years ago. We have the second volume coming out in April. Tell us about your chapter. Honored to be a returning author. Thank you so much and, you know, shout out to Jamie and the whole JSA crew for doing this wonderful thing that helps the industry. It's very mid-eminent. This greener data 2 chapter, this time around, I'm really excited about because it captures, it takes a real estate concept, adaptive reuse, which has been around in the field for a long time. And it really goes into the detail of how adaptive reuse actually solves three major problems we're having today in the industry. And the first is sustainability. We all have sustainability pressures from the board level, right? Very, very important. The second is the rise of AI. In the last year or so, since the street got so interested in this new technology, we have taken a radical new direction in the industry around cooling, power density, design, you know, cabinet layouts. It's really, really amazing. And we don't have too many answers for that. And then thirdly, we are really challenged to find land and power. It's a race. It's all about the power. Used to be ping, power and pipe, where the three things we looked at for data center sites now, particularly from the JLL perspective, we help a lot of folks with site selection. It's really all about power. So adaptive reuse, taking an existing building, reusing it, either with a modular solution or future fitting it or retrofitting it. It saves all the investment and carbon impact of concrete and steel that you would otherwise have from building a new site.  And these are in buildings that have already had planned power in sometimes urban areas where there is power capacity. So it solves a lot more detail to it, but it solves some of the most pressing issues we have today. And we actually have a long history of adaptive reuse in the data center field. We forget this. Look at the Carrier Hotel, 350 Surmac. That was an old Ardonnelly printing press facility where they printed the Sears catalog and the Yellow Pages, Accord, 111 8th QTS Super in Atlanta. All these are adaptive reuse projects. And we're good at this. And we've kind of gotten away from it. We've gotten a little more disposable. And that's not very sustainable. So adaptive reuse is worth taking a look at. And we're going to expound on this quite a bit this year at JLL. And I like to point out that in the US alone, there's five billion square feet of commercial real estate. It's not all properly utilized or maybe a little underutilized now with the changes in how we work. So it's a great opportunity, again, to take this concept, this real estate concept, and apply it to data centers. And we've been doing it for a long time. So really excited about this. And Sean, you know, we've worked, we've known you at JSA for many years now. You're an expert in this space, right? We've had you speak to us in many different ways on roundtables. And you have a little, obviously, we just heard you what you were just saying, but you have even more to say on the idea of sustainability and why it matters to our industry. Why is it important to you? You know, I take sustainability. I kind of have a more of a personal answer here. So we've been talking about sustainability for a long time in the industry. It's really, really hard. 81% of JLL top 50 customers have ESG goals from the board level. Only 19% of them have a publicly funded and planned resolution path. So this is really, really hard stuff. And it's hard to do and it's hard to start. And the way I engage people and suggest they look at sustainability is really starting with a personal, you know, think globally, but act locally. And my claim to fame or my kind of where I put my stake in the ground and this one is I decided to have a net carbon impact of zero heating my home. So I burned deadfall from my 30 acres of woods behind my house to heat my home. And I wanted to try that out as an exercise in personal sustainability to kind of put my money where my mouth is. And it's hard. It's a lot of work getting a fire or wood burning stove going in the morning to heat your home. Especially this time of year, when it's chilly outside Wisconsin, where there's a foot of snow on the ground and sub zero temperature. So I implore everyone to act locally and personally first to understand the challenges of sustainability and not just think it's a trend or something that's easy to do or you plug in an EV and there you're done that type of thing or you buy, you know, PPAs as a data center operator. So I put a personal challenge out to everyone to do something in their own life to understand the impact of sustainability and what it actually means to do it and that it is extra work, which informs how we work in the greater world and what we're doing in industry and how we run facilities. So on that note, I mean, I think that's a great call out to everyone to take responsibility for this and that's some of the work that's being done by bringing the industry together through things like greener data, the I'm Mason's climate accord, all these initiatives are taking place. What's working from your perspective? What sorts of trends are you seeing in sustainability that are changing the face of things? Well, we're really not so good at the industry at calling out how good we are at sustainability.  I was at Microsoft, I was working under Christian Bellotti, who is the progenitor of the PUE. We gamified it, we put a number on it, made it a metric and drove it down, did really good things. We drove down our electricity consumption and it had a pretty significant impact on the bottom line. So we're really good at this type of stuff. And similarly, with sustainability these days, what we are really good at is gamifying. So measuring things like PUE and water usage, and now we're seeing the embrace of innovative new cooling strategies to accommodate the density of AI, which is really pushing us into a whole new paradigm of technology moving from air to liquid. So we embrace innovation very, very well in the space, which sometimes is paradoxical because the best operators in our space don't like change, don't do change because this leads to complexity and more entropy and so on and so forth. But I say what's working is our new embrace of innovation around technologies and power density and cooling brought on by the need for AI and really doing some different things and changing the way we've been doing operational excellence in O&Ms for the last 20 years or so. So there's positive change on the horizon. There is. There's all kinds of positives. We all work really, really hard to do this stuff really, really well. And we have the right people working on it, the right minds at play and the right steps being taken. Absolutely. This conference is a clear demonstration of that. Sean, thank you. I know it's so busy. I'm sure you have 10 places to be in the next hour, but we always appreciate you taking the time to chat with us and our JSA audience. So thank you. Thank you, Barb and the whole JSA team and JSA keep doing a bang up job and doing these wonderful things that help the whole industry. Thank you, Sean. And thank you to our viewers for tuning in again today on SA TV. Happy networking.


Welcome folks, we are the Dow Industrials, finish down 45, Nasdaq was off 23, S&Ps off 14, Gold, Gold Contract out here, it's up $6.30, 17.88, we had Silver up 13 cents, $20.33, LightSweep Crew down 5 bucks, $93.64 a barrel, notes and bonds, they just continue higher folks, pretty amazing. You have the 10-year, up 11 ticks, trading 121.16, the 30-year, up a full point at $144.30 in the bottom line, we just cracked the 2.6 or 2.584 on the 10-year note. King Dollar, King Dollar down 484 ticks, trading 105, 419, that's very unusual that we have King Dollar almost down half a penny and the market was still red and you're in window dressing. Let's take a break, that's my take on this, Euro is 102, Yen is 131, the British pound is at 1.22 to 1.00 US dollar, we get over and take a look at the spy, what do you have out here, you have a sideways move, you get a contraction of volume, we did 62 million shares, that's versus 87 million and that's versus 79 million you're going into. And the X100, the 3Qs, what do we do with the 3Qs, 3Qs out here, still light on the volume, bottom line is that the 3Qs also didn't hold price, so 3.16, 39, yeah close underneath it, so the 3Qs are saying it wants to back down a bit, the big swing is 3.14, 56 and you're still, this divergence here, look at this number, so right here, June 1st is still your benchmark and we're over it, so you know, you get a contraction of volume, 44 million versus Friday 57, the rest of the swing point is 59. Right, you're over the 59, you know, so we'll see how this shakes out, what is happening is that you are also coming right into ice, okay, so you have two different areas that are going to provide quite a bit of resistance right now, because that supply line, let's go look at this, actually I want to do this this way, watch this, this is pretty cool, put it up like this, okay, so this is quite a supply line man, because this supply line, look at this, yeah you do it this way, this is how you do it, it's a big supply line, yeah, it's a huge supply line, yeah, this thing wants to back down first, this supply line goes back to May of 2021 folks, okay, so most of the time you get up to that, you're gonna build, you have to build some cars, you're back and fill, back and fill and bang, then that baby should be able to do it, have a great night folks, have a safe night, come back and visit Tommy tomorrow morning, kick us off 9 o'clock in the morning, great show folks.


It's a pleasure to see participants, colleagues around the room and online. And as Sam was just saying, I think this session comes very timely. Protection risks linked with conflict and violence are driving humanitarian needs, including food insecurity, while lack of food will lead to increased exposure and the risk to face violence, abuse and deprivation. And we also see that the most vulnerable groups, including but not limited to women and children, are often the hardest hit. Sam talked about the relationship between food insecurity, conflict and protection risks that is circular and mutually reinforcing. So I think this is an excellent opportunity to discuss how we can break this cycle. Addressing and mitigating protection risks is one of the priorities in Sweden's humanitarian strategy through SIDA. And among other things, we support interventions that should contribute to actively preventing violence and abuse, reducing the vulnerability of affected population and strengthening their agency. We also committed to contribute to the reduction of protection risks and achievement of protection outcomes regardless of sector. And both we are really and deeply committed to the centrality of protection through our humanitarian assistance. We have since a few years supported many of the partners involved in this event to develop and roll out results-based protection, which can involve direct support to country operations. We also support partners to develop and roll out protection policies, tools and guidelines, including for risk analysis. And currently we also support action-based research on the linkages between conflict-driven food insecurity and protection risks with a strong community dialogue and decision-making, of course. Sweden is committed to flexible and multi-year funding, which we believe is also enabling contextualized risk mitigation and response. And as Sam said, we are really convinced that identifying and understanding protection risks remained fundamental to protecting affected population in the first place. We are also convinced that identifying risks helps us to provide equality, immediate humanitarian response, while at the same time reducing further escalation of acute needs. I think it's essential to strengthen collective efforts to understand and identify protection risks, including through inclusiveness and collaboration with affected communities and local actors. We all have a responsibility to contribute to reducing risks and deliver on collective protection outcomes as stated in the Interagency Steering Committee policy on protection. So to us, protection must inform humanitarian decision-making and response. It should be central to our preparedness efforts as part of immediate and life-saving activities and throughout the duration of humanitarian response and beyond. A shared understanding of risks and threats enables various actors to design multi-sector programmes to increase the capacity of communities to overcome threats and to change behaviour of those that are responsible for the threats. And here I think we need to highlight the opportunity to increasingly work in complementarity with development and peace actors and to collectively identify and deliver on protection outcomes. I'm looking forward to this session and to learning from you all. And thank you again for coming.


We return to Larry and Phyllis who are tasked to do an experiment in chemistry class. Only one of them can act at a time, and so they take up different tasks, Phyllis reading from the list of test requirements, and Larry assuring that they are available and ready for use. To the question of why this happens, people working in coordination are many times more effective than people working in isolated units. This is a simple observation from early 1900s, and largely accounts for the success of industrial engineering and form and based work management. And again, Dan, who is very good in sports, tells Mark, who strengthens in the classroom subjects, that he will work with him in getting a shot on the baseball team if he will tutor Dan in math. Mark, who really wants to make the team, agrees. This is a basic contract. Contracts are mutual promises. If you do this for me, then I will do that for you. This is the best developed area of modern law, as it is fundamental to almost everything we officially do together. A version of this agreement is used in employment. Another version is applied in marriage. Yet another in the law of agency addressing how one person can represent another. Performance contracts are intentional win-win agreements where all parties to the contract expect to come out ahead for having taken part. When there is a win-win agreement, each party has a basis for trust that the other party will perform, and trust is a universal value. We also face the reality that there are people who look upon interactions as a way to get things from other people. This applies to childhood bullies, as well as professional thieves and robbers. An effective adult will have to recognize the difference and avoid the effort of poorly guided people when seeking coordination. In performance thinking, the contract is a process, a means for gaining a valued result. That valued result is not necessarily the same for both parties to a contract, but must be real, attainable, and valued by both. The appropriate legal term is consideration. It is a commitment made by a party to the contract, a cost that is being incurred in order to gain the result. Contracts are only enforced where there is mutual consideration, where each party has something to lose if the result is not accomplished. If there is consideration by only one party, it is a promise rather than a contract. Contract agreements to coordinate efforts are win-win arrangements, where all the people who take part expect to gain what they value from their coordinated efforts. You should note that these are not support agreements where one party helps another to attain something as might happen with friendship. This is where both parties are active for the purpose of gaining a mutually valued result. It is a contract offer when a parent tells a child to try something and that they will receive a reward if they do. The child gets to experience something new or to endure something not self-rewarding. The parent gets cooperation for an agreed price. It involves a coordinated effort where the parent and child both gain what they value. It is a contract offer when a teacher offers some special consideration to a student for demonstrating that they have understood a lesson. The very purpose of making the offer is for both the teacher and student to get what they value. It is a contract offer when a young lad offers a girl a token of affection, a class ring or the like. If she accepts, they both get the benefits of being a couple instead of just friends. It is a contract offer when a student is associated with a school in order to earn a certificate. The school gets recognition for completing a phase of educational support for which it has been paid and the student gets the official document attesting to completion of the course of study. The concept of contract is a way that people come into coordination. It is a way for each party to trust the other to perform their part of the effort because they gain value when they do. To create a performance contract, you must find value in what the other person values. This is one of the reasons we learn about one another so that we can see the value where we value the same end result and harness our joint efforts to getting things done. Trust is the heart of performance and trust is generally found where the desired effort yields what the other party to the contract also values. Contracts do not create trust. It is trust that sets the human foundation for entering into contracts.


Hey everybody, welcome back to magic orthodoxy. My name is David and this is a top 10 Hey today, we're gonna look at the top 10 decks from theory 11 a lot of people have been Asking for these top 10 lists saying they like it They say give us more give us more top 10 lists and then whenever people comment and say which top 10 list they want The most of you have been asking for 311. So here it is 311. Hey, if you don't know 311 311 launched back in 2007 with a team of 11 artists United with one purpose in mind and that was to advance inspire and create wonder and since that moment 311 has propelled forward to become the largest community of magic creators with over 1500 Registered artists and hundreds of thousands of members around the world. All right. So top 10 decks top 10 Theory 11 decks. Let's go number 10 the bicycle titanium I know this seems like a weird one, but I don't know that people know that this is out here It's a quality Rider-back, it's the back design the box and even the court cards that you are familiar with But they utilize a metallic ink that radiates light in a really subtle and elegant manner The box has metallic foil on five sides Showcasing the original rider-back design that you know and love it's available in two colors steel blue and crimson red The bicycle titanium addition playing cards were printed from the United States playing card company using the finest quality stock and finish They feel smooth. They're not too rigid right out of the box number nine the monarchs Monarchs were featured throughout the blockbuster heist movie now. You see me alongside Jesse Eisenberg Mark Ruffalo Woody Harrelson, they also made a reappearance in the sequel. They look like they belong in a palace You got gold foil it all surrounds The elegant navy blue box design gold metallic foil is striking with a vintage timeless aesthetic They're absolutely breathtaking and they feel as good as they look number eight the rebels Rebel playing cards feature a custom design box back design ace of spades Joker The back design proudly features the United States Capitol building it's a timeless symbol of our nation's united spirit of independence For the first time in 50 years Rebels features a die-cut tax stamp seal with frayed edges across the card backs You have the Latin phrase light in darkness number seven the rare bits This deck features metallic ink. I have the copper one here You got that on the back and faces all custom court cards elegant simple design by Jay Fletcher in Charleston, South Carolina Inspired by a vintage speak easy restaurant called the rare bit, which is also in Charleston The rare bit playing cards became an instant collectors item when they were released back in 2013 even the first edition sold out Record shattering 16 hours and right now on eBay. They go for about 200 bucks number six the artisan This deck was featured in departures magazine Artisans have received rave reviews around the world David Copperfield called them the best playing cards ever produced They're illustrated by hand in South Africa Artisans are in a league of their own a breathtaking mix of elegance style and sophistication Designed by Simon Frouse these premium luxury playing cards feature elegant gold foil hot stamped on ultra luxe black paper number five the tycoon This is a premium Designer playing card produced in collaboration with Steve Cohen. Who's the millionaire's magician? He's a star of chamber magic, which is a headline show out in New York and This deck was originally inspired by the Waldorf Astoria Which was a legendary gathering place for royalty and the ultra wealthy No expense was spared for this new edition these you're looking at are the ivory edition tycoons Which are enclosed in an off-white premium tuck case Shielded in gold foil and the card of back design is printed with a gold metallic ink Number four the citizens I think these are the most intricate breathtaking playing cards ever produced illustrated in America by Kevin Kentrell Every aspect was handcrafted with relentless unrivaled attention to detail even the inside of the box Has a breathtaking intricate pattern the Joker back design They all bear the Latin phrase fortune favors the brave number three Medallions a blend of sheer elegance and striking beauty a timeless object infused with supreme luxury from the Victorian era Design is accented by embossed stitch elements in the front and sealed with the signature precision printed gold foil sticker seal They were designed in Paris, France Number two the nomad playing cards these were produced in Collaboration with the nomad hotel in New York City Back in the 19th century the nomad district of New York was the meeting place of all of that era's elite featuring Oscar Wilde Charles Dickens Mark Twain Tesla The vision for this deck was to create Cards that would serve as a monument to the nomad hotel and I think the result is a timeless blend of beauty and Elegance and number one contraband designed in the United Kingdom by Joe White Contraband playing cards were inspired by secret societies conspiracy theories and everything Unknown every single playing card within the contraband deck was designed from scratch even the aces jokers court cards They display attention to detail Never before achieved over a year in the making and every minute is visible in the final design All right, so that is my top 10 theory 11 decks did I miss one did I miss your favorite? Did you think wow what the heck? Why did you put that at number eight and not at number three? Tell us below tell us which decks are your favorite if I missed one if you if you have another favorite You know let us know I do try to answer all of your comments and questions because why else would you have a YouTube channel? If you weren't gonna answer your fans right come on I'll try to do more of these top 10s in the future. I'll see you guys next time. Bye You


One of the issues we've run into with using just a string is the fact that strings are immutable. What do we do? If I have an integer that's too big, we used a big integer class. Well, guess what? We have something just like that for our string data type. We can start to expand on it using something called the string builder class. We also can use something called string buffer. It's a little different, but we'll talk about buffers a little later on in the semester. One thing to take note of is you can see we've got the UML constructors going on here. We have a noR constructor, one that takes an integer and one that takes a string. That integer one, that one's interesting. Even if we look at, say, for example, the noR, notice how it says it has a capacity of 16. Then we can say we can make that any number we want just by passing an integer. The idea behind this is, if we think about a standard string for a second, a standard string can have no characters whatsoever, and so this is a dot length of zero. Or it can have a giant large amount to it that I have no idea about. That can be dot length 5,000, 50,000. I could put the incomplete works of William Shakespeare inside of a string, hopefully a bridge. But I could do that. Now, that's annoying. So what we can work with is now this string builder class. We say that this string builder class, I wanted to have the capacity. I want it to be a specific size that I can work with string builder. So say, for example, 10. I have the capacity of storing 10 characters in this. Now you're thinking, all right, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. That doesn't sound like a lot, and you're telling me that this is supposed to be more flexible. Well, what happens is, let's say, for example, we do that. We create the capacity to store 10 characters, capacity, and I add in the word welcome. That's seven characters already being used, just one word. Then I add in a space. Now I'm at eight, and I add in the word two. Now I'm at 10. Oh my goodness, I can't do anything else. Mr. Guida, you said that this was supposed to be more flexible. It is. Guess what happens when I do this? Java doesn't freak out. The string builder doesn't freak out. What happens is it increases the capacity, capacity. So then when I do this, even though I'm at 16 characters total, guess what? I have, all of a sudden, enough to work on that. So here's a little exercise for you. If you were to write this code out, what is the capacity? I'll let you take a second, and we'll just keep on moving on. So we have tons of different methods available, that was a terrible squiggly, but I have, with my umeligan, some class methods that I can work with. I have, for example, a pen. You see, there are overloaded appends. There are four append methods, because we can overload a method. We can overload a method. Each one of these has a different data signature. One is adding a char array, one has a char array with an offset and a length to it. One says just any primitive data type will work, an integer, a double, whatever, char. And then guess what? We have the string one. Then you see we have sort of delete, delete char at. So if I wanted to say, for example, we look at this string array, I come in afterwards and I do string builder, if I come in and I say str build, delete char at, char at one. What happens? Well, that e goes away and my string suddenly, without having to create something new, make substrings string concatenate, it becomes, welcome to Java, Java without the e, no e. That's pretty nice if you think about it. And we can continue going on. We've got our insert, so I can insert four different ways, just like I could append. I've got a replace. I have, even here's a nice one, reverse. I can take my string and I can just reverse it around. That's nice. We have a few others. So again, I told you what was the capacity of string build. Guess what you can do? You can come in here and you can just simply write out str build dot capacitive, capacitive. There we are. I meant to do that.  We have something str build dot trim to size because again, we don't need to store up too much space on our computer. So we say, shrink it down to only the characters. As you can see, we've got now these classes that we can work with, play with, and do a little bit more flexible control with our basic data.


It was just chicken, salmon, broccoli, potatoes. I don't eat fish, I don't like salmon. That's not normal fish. What's a lot of fish?  I don't even know what it is.  Somebody just told me yesterday that you gotta take the L. Yeah man, unless you want to be out here having people thinkin' you eat salmon.      Beyonce. Rihanna. Shit.   You see how expensive that sounds? Damn. Now you can put it on the menu for $27 and up.  You know what I'm sayin'? Salmon.  Salmon. Talapea. Talapea. I know it's a Project Chick, somewhere in America named Talapea. Hey, I'm right behind you. They named me kids.  Talapea. They can hold the party. They ain't gotta do that. Talapea. No man. Girl named Talapea. Oh. Can't wait to go check this out. This album. I picked up the album the day I went out to. That was right that day. It's a press play. It's a press play for us. That's right. I will. I see you got the black x-men to be with. With trends. Absolutely. I used to be happy that I was a producer. No 30. No 30, yeah. Yeah, I was a no 30. Yeah, so I was a no 30 man. I've been working with a man. Where you from? Like, from like, Switzerland. Shit. But everything like, that I see from that, that he post man, brought with me. It's a coincidence that both of the last two works were produced, you know what I'm sayin'? I think this is dope how y'all really liked it and did the whole project. Y'all seen me do that, y'all bad. Yeah, so I'm creatin' some stretch. Bass. Oh. Yeah.  All right. That's how far he is.   Like, he might not even respond to the text. He might just like, double tap and like message, he might get it down, he still got that mid-flag. I know. I believe in this one. Man.  I remember he had 400 followers. I was number one. Man. You probably wouldn't have remembered.  You know. You know. Man. Man. Man. Man. Man.