The Fetch TV Smartbox 8000 160GB Freeview+ PVR packs numerous punches, including a networkable multi-media hub; Wi-Fi and wired internet; on-demand movies and TV.
It's very similar to BT Vision, only you don't need to subscribe to channel packages or be a BT broadband customer.
The ace up its sleeve, though, is the provision of the BBC iPlayer service.
The plasticky Smartbox tries to look more expensive than it is, without succeeding. The fascia takes its unobtrusiveness too far, as the only visual communication it offers is a grey LED that goes a paler shade of grey when the box is on. No handy channel numbers or record/playback indication.
The remote control leaves a lot to be desired, too. Tiny buttons and icons make navigating the onscreen menus a frustrating process.
Connectivity is better, though. All the main AV bases are covered, plus there are dual USBs and an Ethernet port. These act as conduits to a world of on-tap entertainment sourced either from your DLNA computer or via the web. And if you don't like wires you can use Wi-Fi.
Installing and setting-up the Smartbox is, annoying remote control aside, a fairly painless experience. I used the Ethernet to connect to my BT Home Hub and was soon able to establish an IP connection without any stress. Whilst not in the class of GUIs from the likes of LG and Panasonic, the overall layout and design of the menu system seems logical enough.
As a Freeview+ PVR the Smartbox does a good job. The EPG floats nicely on top of the broadcast show and can be formatted in several ways.
Recordings can be renamed and exported to USB. Playing back, the 100x quick scan mode makes a mockery of Sky's laboured 30x maximum.
Playing photo, music and movie files from external devices works okay but you can't copy files on to the hard drive.
Fetch TV makes a big deal of its Catch Up TV service, but I found the selection less than compelling. Free content includes a variety of podcasts (big deal) whilst pay TV ranges from 99p documentaries to movies at £3.49 (viewable for 24 hours in a seven-day window). Tragically, the HD selection currently comprises around only five (indifferent) titles.
The folder structure of the Catch Up part of the guide makes browsing a pain. BBC iPlayer replicates pretty much the online version but annoyingly lacks HD support. Image quality is acceptable but fast-forwarding can cause the box to crash (possibly also due to BT's lamentably low broadband bitrate in my area).
Overall, this is a very good Freeview+ box with decent media centre functionality. But worryingly for Fetch TV it has no monopoly on iPlayer and the rest of its Catch Up TV selection remains rather unenticing.


Lada Russian Car Drift is a great racing game to drift your brains out on different types of tracks. Hop in your cool and classy vehicle and start speeding and using your handbrake to perform the longest drifts ever seen to earn money. Avoid hitting your car against the wall or any kind of obstacles too often or your run will be over sooner than expected. Upgrade and tune your car or just buy a new one and don't stop until you have set the highest score possible on every track. Enjoy Lada Russian Car Drift!


Asked by ellascientist to David, Jonathan, Pete, Sam on 8 Jul 2012.
Hi ellascientist! I'm not sure what dynamic equilibrium is – it sounds like a chemistry term though?!
Hi Ella. Despite what you learn at school some reactions can be reversible. The rate of the forward reaction can be different from the backward reaction or it can be the same. If it is the same then we call it a dynamic equilibrium.


Looking for a better way to plan your charitable giving? The T. Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving* lets you handle your charitable donations with one convenient account.
*The T. Rowe Price Program for Charitable Giving is an independent, nonprofit corporation and donor-advised fund founded by T. Rowe Price to assist individuals with planning and managing their charitable giving.
Lock in your tax deduction now; support charities at your leisure.
No minimum account fee and low administration costs.
Are Donor-Advised Funds Right for You?
Take a short quiz to see if donor-advised funds fit your charitable goals.
The Program handles your account administration.
Choice of T. Rowe Price-managed investment pools.
Questions? Speak with a Program Representative at 877-238-9454.
Or, log in now to access your account.
All investments are subject to market risk, including the possible loss of principal. Mutual funds are subject to management fees and expenses.


text:
Seven die during police, militant clashes in India
Gunmen kill policemen after attacking checkpoint in Delta
COVID-19 offers us time to re-examine workers' welfare- Edo …
Sanwo-Olu promises Sec. school teachers, others car packages
By Esther Kalu	 Last updated Dec 30, 2021
No fewer than seven people have died during a clash where Indian security forces shot dead six militants and one soldier in a series of operations in disputed Kashmir, India.
The clash was said to be as a result of a crackdown against insurgent groups which continues after a spate of civilian killings this year.
Confirming the clash on Thursday, the Kashmir valley's police chief, Vijay Kumar stated that Six militants, including two Pakistan nationals, have been killed in two separate encounters with the security forces in Anantnag and Kulgam districts of Kashmir.
"An Indian army soldier was also killed in the back-to-back gun battles that took place in southern Kashmir" he said.
As gathered, India has long accused Pakistan of stoking an insurgency since the 1990s in Kashmir – a Himalayan region that both nuclear-armed neighbours claim in full but control only parts of.
Islamabad denies the charge, saying it only provides diplomatic and moral backing for the self-determination of Kashmiri people.
Earlier this year, the disputed region witnessed a wave of civilian killings, with militants seemingly targeting non-Kashmiris, including migrant workers, and members of the minority Hindu and Sikh communities in the Muslim-majority Kashmir valley. Indian forces in the heavily-militarised region responded with a widespread crackdown.
According to a police official who declined to be named, Anti-insurgency operations in federally-administered Jammu and Kashmir continue with more than 189 militants and 44 security personnel killed in Kashmir this year.
"Forty-one civilians were killed this year as compared to last year when 33 civilians were killed in militancy related incidents," he said.
Saudi limits mosques capacity, reimposes social distancing due to Omicron
JUST IN: Oyo APC rates Makinde's performance low on infrastructures, governance, others

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Nineteenth century scientists wondered whether the transmission velocity of light varies depending upon: 1) the motion of light's emitting body, 2) the motion of light's medium, and 3) the linear motions of matter to which light relates. Several early experiments seemed to give answers, but their results were often distorted by the imaginary concept of stationary ether. By 1880 there was more confusion, and there were more false assumptions than there were real answers.
A. Three questions that need to be answered.
It can be a daunting task to attempt to sort out and explain, let alone understand, the labyrinth of false assumptions, invalid theories, irrelevant equations, false conjectures, paradoxes, and misinterpreted experiments that (during the last two centuries) have confused and distorted physics in general. And in particular Maxwell's concept of the constant transmission velocity of light at c. Most prominently included within this labyrinth are the arbitrary concepts of stationary ether as an absolute reference frame; Newton's absolute space and absolute time; the theories of "ether drag" and "partial ether drag;" the Michelson & Morley null results; Fitzgerald's, Lorentz's and Einstein's contraction of matter theories; the misapplication of Galileo's Relativity to light; the Lorentz transformation equations; and above all, Einstein's theories of relativity.
Since a basic understanding of each of the above is necessary to an appreciation of the current untenable situation and to its ultimate solutions, we will do our best, in this and later chapters, to state and explain such confusion and distortions in as straightforward, simple and understandable terms as possible. We will thereafter set forth and explain the real facts and the real solutions for the false assumptions, paradoxes and other problems that have been created and still exist.
As previously stated, because Maxwell's equations (which contained the constant transmission velocity of a light ray at c) were written with respect to the theoretical material medium of stationary ether at rest in absolute space, it was asserted by 19th century scientists and others that such equations were only valid for that absolute stationary reference frame (Resnick, 1968, pp. 16 – 17). Assuming that this incorrect assertion was true, it was then asked by the same scientists, "What is the transmission velocity of a light ray with respect to material bodies which are in linear motion relative to the stationary ether reference frame and relative to such transmitting light ray?"
If such 19th century scientists had realized that the concept of stationary ether was just a fictitious myth (like phlogiston and caloric), and that a stationary ether reference frame does not and could not exist, then they probably never would have made such assertions or asked such questions because they would obviously have been meaningless. Likewise, all of the experiments and theories that were later concocted in order to attempt to answer such meaningless questions probably never would have occurred. Thus, Maxwell's constant transmission velocity of light at c in the abstract or relative to the medium through which it propagates might never have been misunderstood nor distorted to the degree that it is today.
Nevertheless, such 19th century scientists did not realize that the stationary ether reference frame was only a myth, so all of such meaningless questions were asked and answered in ad hoc, absurd and invalid ways. As a consequence, Maxwell's concept of the constant transmission velocity of light at c relative to its real medium of empty space (a vacuum) was totally misunderstood by everyone, and especially Einstein who invented Special Relativity in a misguided and futile effort to unravel the confusion. Special Relativity has, in turn, distorted all of physics and science in general.
The valid questions that should have been asked and answered by such 19th century scientists have nothing to do with the false concept of stationary ether. They include the following: Does the constant transmission velocity of light at c vary depending upon: 1) the motion of a light ray's emitting body; 2) the motion of the medium through which such light ray propagates; or 3) the linear motions of material bodies toward or away from such propagating light ray.
In order to answer these three valid and relevant questions, let us first consider the concepts of linear motions (velocities) of material bodies relative to each other. Where a train is being propelled at a constant velocity of 60 km/h relative to the rails (v1), and a man walks through the train at the constant velocity of 3 km/h in the direction of the train's motion (v2), the total speed of the man will be 63 km/h relative to the rails[1] (Figure 7.1A). This result represents the simple law of the "computation of relative speeds" for material objects, which Einstein characterized as the "classical addition of velocities" (Einstein, Relativity, pp. 19 – 20).
Likewise, where a material object, such as a bullet, is fired from the speeding train and accelerates away from the train in the direction of the train's motion, the velocity (v1) of the train is added to the muzzle velocity (v5) of the bullet in order to determine the total velocity (v6) of the bullet relative to the rails (v1 + v5 = v6)[2] (Figure 7.1C). Similar computations apply to other trains and bullets being propelled in the same and opposite directions (Figures 7.1D, E, F, G and H).
Very importantly for our later discussions in Figure 7.1 the propelled velocity of the walking man, each moving train and the muzzle velocity of the bullet also exhibit relative velocities of approach or separation with respect to each other.[3]
Within the context of the above examples and analogies, let us now precisely restate the questions that were facing such 19th century scientists. Do Maxwell's theories of light and his electromagnetic wave equations mean exactly what they specifically state or imply: that a ray of light transmits in all possible directions over vast distances of empty space at the constant transmission velocity of c (300,000 km/s) in the abstract or relative to the medium of ether or a vacuum at the instant that such light ray comes into existence, and regardless of the linear motion of its emitting body or the linear velocity of any material body with respect to which such light ray may propagate? Or does the transmission velocity of a light ray vary in every possible direction because of the linear motion of the light ray's emitting body, because of the motion of its medium, or because of the linear velocity of any material body relative to which such light ray propagates?
Before we proceed, it should be noted that throughout this treatise we will refer to the vacuum or void of empty space through which light transmits at velocity c as a "medium," even though that term is usually reserved for a material medium such as air or the hypothetical ether. The rationale for this somewhat unorthodox definition and generalization of the meaning of "medium" is as follows. First of all, Maxwell himself specifically referred to light constantly propagating throughout a vacuum at velocity c (see Maxwell's Papers, Vol. 1, p. 580). Secondly, if Maxwell's theories of light and his equations were valid through the mythical material medium of ether, but ether does not exist, they should be equally valid through what remains…the vacuum of empty space, and what remains (the vacuum of empty space) should continue to be equally as valid as ether as a medium (material or otherwise). What else is light transmitting through at velocity c from a distant star to the Earth, other than the vacuum of empty space? How and what else was light actually transmitting through at velocity c during the 19th century? It was always the same medium: the almost perfect vacuum of empty space.
B. The Motion of Light's Source Body
First, let us examine the question: Does the transmission velocity of a light ray at velocity c relative to the medium of empty space vary depending upon the speed and direction of motion of the source body from which such light ray is emitted? For the answer, we will defer to Willem de Sitter's empirical binary star theory which asserts that the orbital velocity (v) of a light emitting binary star must not be added to (c + v) or subtracted from (c – v) the velocity c of the light which the star emits, because this would necessarily result in "ghost star" images in a binary star system,[4] which images have never been observed (Figure 7.2; Bergmann, p. 19; Dingle, 1972, pp. 205 – 207; Einstein, Relativity, p. 21). Based on De Sitter's binary star observations and his resulting empirical theory, Einstein postulated:
"[L]ight is always propagated in empty space with a definite velocity c which is independent of the state of motion of the emitting body"[5] (Einstein, 1905d [Dover, 1952, p. 38]).
De Sitter's theory and the underlined part of Einstein's postulate are compatible with Maxwell's equations based on the wave theory of light (Bergmann, p. 19), with the 1851 interference experiment of Fizeau (Section C of this Chapter),[6] with the null result of the Michelson & Morley experiment (Chapter 9),[7] and with empirical measurements of the speed of sound waves.[8] Measurements of the velocity of starlight received on Earth from stars with different relative speeds also appear to confirm these conclusions.[9] Therefore, let us accept De Sitter's theory and the (underlined) second part of Einstein's above postulate as valid.[10]
C. The Motion of the Medium
Next, let us examine the second question: Does the transmission velocity of light at velocity c vary depending upon the motion of the material medium through which it propagates? With respect to the vacuum of empty space the answer is obviously no, because the vacuum of empty space (by definition) is not a material medium and how can the "nothing" of a vacuum (vis. empty space) move? Therefore, let us confine the remainder of our discussion to material mediums that do move.
As we discovered in Chapter 6, when a light ray propagates through a stationary material medium (i.e. water), it does not transmit relative to that medium at velocity c, but rather at a different velcity that is less than c (Figure 6.8). Now the question becomes: Does the linear motion of such material medium (i.e. water) cause a light ray to transmit at a different velocity relative to such moving medium than when such medium was not moving (i.e. stationary water)?
Where sound is emitted in the direction of a terrestrial wind, the speed v1 of the wind (the moving medium) is added to (or subtracted from) the transmission speed of sound v2 in order to determine the total speed (v3 of the sound relative to the surface of the Earth v1 ± v2 = v3) (Gamow, 1961, p. 162; also see Chapter 8). Do material "combinations of speeds" also occur with non-material light in the moving medium of water?
By 1851, technology had progressed to the point where French scientist Armond Fizeau (1819 – 1896) was able to test the effect of a moving medium (vis. pure water) on the velocity of light that passed through such moving medium. In Fizeau's interference of light experiment (Figure 7.3), a ray of in-phase monochromatic light (Figure 7.4A) was emitted from a terrestrial light source and propagated toward a partially reflective glass plate called a "beam splitter." The beam splitter had a thin layer of silver on it just thick enough to reflect one half of the light ray (pencil A) in a perpendicular direction toward mirror M1. The other half of the light ray (pencil B) passed through the partially reflective glass plate toward mirror M3. The two pencils of light traveled along two opposing light paths that were slightly different in length, one clockwise and the other counter clockwise.[11] When the two pencils of light met again at the eye of Figure 7.4B) and established an interference pattern of dark and light rings (called "interference fringes") when viewed through a small telescope[12] (Figure 7.4C). When the water in the tubes was at rest relative to the tubes this interference fringe pattern remained constant (Figure 7.4D1).
Based on the known length of each monochromatic light wave and the known velocity of light through the medium of water at rest (w) (approx. 226,000 km/s), Fizeau calculated that the speed of water flowing through the tubes must be 7 m/s (v) in order to change the relative phase of the light waves propagating through the moving water by about one half of a wave length (Figure 7.4D2) over the 150 cm length of the tube (Goldberg, p. 440; Gamow, 1961, pp. 162 – 163). Sure enough, when the water was allowed to flow through the tube at 7 m/s from the water tank four stories above the experiment, Fizeau observed through the telescope that the interference fringe pattern shifted about 44% of a wavelength (Figure 7.4D2).
This shift in the pattern of interference fringes implied to Fizeau that the flow of the water (v) caused a difference in the time interval for the light pencils to travel their courses, and that this time interval difference was manifested by such fringe shift. He concluded that about 44% of the speed of the water (v) is added to or subtracted from to the velocity of the light (w) propagating (through the ether) in the moving water, depending upon the direction of the flow[13] (Gamow, 1961, p. 163). In effect, Fizeau (reasoning on the basis of the ether theory) conjectured that "the motion of the water only partially drags the ether," and hence also the light embedded in the ether in the water[14] (Goldberg, p. 443). Fresnel's algebraic equation which described these empirical results was W = w + v (1 – 1/n2)[15] (Einstein, Relativity, p. 46, F.N.).
When one ignores the mythical concepts of ether and ether drag, the empirical results of the "Experiment of Fizeau" become much clearer. They suggest that the transmission velocity of light in stationary water w is totally independent of the velocity of the source of the radiation (vis. the solar orbital velocity of the Earth)[16] and that it is partially independent of the motion of the transmitting medium (water). The "Experiment of Fizeau" paradoxically appeared to contradict the material theorem of the "computation of relative velocities,[17] which asserts that 100% of the speed of the water (v) should have been added to or subtracted from the velocity of the light in the moving water (w)[18] (Figure 7.1). What was the answer to this paradox? To this date there is no accepted explanation.[19]
Why did the motion of the water v only result in a change of the velocity of the light in the moving water equal to 44% of v? Why did this magnitude occur in two opposite directions? We will now suggest a possible answer.
Remember from Chapter 6 that water is much more densely packed with atomic particles (i.e. electrons) than air. Therefore it takes more time for each photon of light to be absorbed by a greater quantity of densely packed atomic particles (electrons) of water and then reemitted (Halliday, p. 893). Again, this should be the reason that wave trains of photons empirically propagate slower in stationary water (226,000 km/s) than in less dense stationary air (299,800 km/s).
With regard to the 1851 experiment of Fizeau, it is suggested by the author that the rapid motion of water causes a photon to encounter a fewer number of water particles (electrons) during a given time interval when it propagates with the water's flow, because the water particles (electrons) are moving away from each propagating photon (Figure 7.5A). Each photon thus takes less time being absorbed and re-emitted by fewer encountered particles. Therefore, the velocity of each photon in the direction of the flow should be slightly greater than 226,000 km/s. By way of extrapolation, if the water was flowing at 1% of the velocity of c, then each photon would catch up to and encounter even fewer numbers of rapidly moving particles during a given time interval. In this event, each photon should propagate through the super fast water much faster than 226,000 km/s + 7 m/s.[20]
On the other hand, when a photon propagates against the water's flow, it should encounter a greater number of water particles (electrons) during a given time interval, because the water particles (electrons) are moving toward the photon. Thus, the velocity of the photon in this direction should be less than 226,000 km/s, because it would take more time being absorbed and re-emitted by a greater number of water particles (Figure 7.5B).
In Fizeau's 1851 experiment, it is suggested that these scenarios empirically caused the total process of absorption and reemission of the photons to be somewhat speeded up with the flow and somewhat slowed down against the flow, by a magnitude equal to 44% of the speed of the water (7 m/s) in each direction. A priori, the motion of the water does not partially transfer the speed of the water to the velocity of the light; nor does it drag or carry the photon along (piggyback style) at an increased or decreased velocity relative to the tube, as hypothesized by Fizeau, Einstein and others.[21] Rather, the motion of the water merely makes it possible for the photon to encounter more or less atomic particles (electrons) during a given time interval, to incur more or fewer processes of absorption and re-emission, and thus to inherently transmit faster or slower through the moving medium of water (Figure 7.5).
The 1851 experiment of Fizeau did not demonstrate the existence or non-existence of the assumed ether itself. Nor did the results of Fizeau's experiment detect any absolute motion of the Earth through or relative to the stationary ether. Nor did it show that the Earth partially dragged the ether along with it, as was theorized by Fizeau, Fresnel and others. Why? Because a few decades later it was demonstrated by Michelson, Einstein and others that there was no ether. It was a myth. Therefore, the concept of ether was superfluous or irrelevant to the results of Fizeau's experiment.
If ether did not exist and therefore was irrelevant to Fizeau's experiment, it must also be irrelevant to Maxwell's equations. If there is no ether in space, then all of space must be empty and Maxwell's equations must be valid for the vacuum of empty space. Since a priori empty space itself is nothing, and nothing cannot move, therefore the constant transmission velocity of light at velocity c cannot vary because of the motion of the medium (empty space) through which it propagates.[22] The 19th century scientists apparently did not realize any of these facts. Neither did Einstein and most of the 20th century scientists realize many of these facts.
Except for the above discussion, the main relevance of the 1851 experiment of Fizeau to this treatise is twofold: 1) it can be used as an empirical analogy to help explain the paradox of the Michelson and Morley experiment (Chapters 9, 10, 11 and 12); and 2) Einstein claimed that Fresnel's empirical formula which described the results of Fizeau's experiment, v′ = v (1 – 1/n2), and thus the paradoxical result of Fizeau's experiment itself, are best described by his Special Theory of Relativity. Later, Einstein and his followers even claimed that Einstein's relativistic equation which describes Fizeau's paradoxical experiment was an exceedingly important experimental confirmation of the validity of Special Relativity (Einstein, Relativity, pp. 43 – 46; Resnick, 1968, p. 37).
However, on the contrary, we have just suggested a quantum physical process that can (not only describe but) fully explain ;the paradoxical results of Fizeau's experiment (whereas Einstein, Fresnel and Fizeau merely mathematically described such paradoxical results). In Chapter 29 we will refute and mathematically disprove Einstein's claim that Fizeau's 1851 experiment was an experimental confirmation of his relativistic composition of velocities formula or his Special Theory.
D. The Linear Motions of Other Material Bodies
Finally, let us turn to the third and most important question presented in this chapter: Does the constant transmission velocity of a light ray at velocity c relative to the medium of empty space vary, depending upon the linear motions of the bodies toward which such light ray propagates?[23] The first experiment that deals with this question was conducted around 1728, the year after Newton's death. British astronomer James Bradley (1693 – 1762) devised an optical experiment designed to measure the magnitude of observed stellar parallaxes[24] (Figure 7.6A). But in the process Bradley discovered that he had to tilt the telescope slightly in the direction of the Earth's motion around the Sun in order to keep the viewed star in the center of the telescope's field of view[25] (Figure 7.6B).
This tilting requirement, which Bradley had discovered by accident, was later called the "aberration of starlight" (Goldberg, pp. 429 – 432). The angle that the telescope must tilt in order to keep the viewed star in the center of the field of view is called the "angle of aberration"[26] (Ibid, p. 431). Since Bradley already knew the Earth's approximate solar orbital distance, he also knew the approximate orbital speed v of the Earth (30 km/s). He computed the distance which he had to tilt the upper end of the telescope (in order to compensate for the orbital speed v of the Earth) compared to the distance light had to travel from the upper end of the telescope to his eye (at the velocity of light). This ratio v/c was approximately 1:10,000[27] (Bergmann, pp. 21 – 23). From this ratio Bradley also computed the approximate finite transmission velocity of light to be 303,000 km/s[28] (Hoffmann, 1983, p. 49).
Among other things, the aberration of starlight also demonstrated that the velocity of starlight does not depend on the state of motion of the medium of transmission (vis. ether or air). Why? Because if it did, starlight that entered the Earth's atmosphere would be swept along by the moving air (or the ether with the embedded light in it would be dragged along by the Earth moving through the ether) and the aberration effect would not exist or would vary in certain directions (Bergmann, pp. 21 – 22).
The aberration of starlight also implied that light had a constant transmission velocity relative to the medium of empty space, regardless of the relative linear speed of its source body (the star). Why? Because the angle of aberration (the ratio 1:10,000) was always the same for every star, regardless of the star's speed or direction of motion relative to the Earth (Ibid, pp. 21 – 23).
In addition, and very importantly, the aberration of light implied that the relative speed or direction of motion of the body (i.e. the Earth) toward which such starlight propagates did not alter the transmission velocity of the starlight, again because the angle of aberration (the ratio 1:10,000) was always the same for every star, regardless of the relative linear speed of the Earth in two opposite directions during its solar orbital motion. Thus, the aberration of starlight also gave a definite answer to our third question: the transmission velocity of light at velocity c does not vary depending upon the linear motion of bodies toward which it propagates. Bradley's experiment constitutes an empirical confirmation of this fact.
Nevertheless, Bradley's experiment resulted in a baffling paradox. How could the velocity of light retain the same value in a terrestrial experiment, regardless of the Earth's relative velocity of 30 km/s in two opposite linear directions?[29]
In 1905 and again in 1916, Einstein challenged Bradley's aberration of light phenomenon[30] and his above empirical confirmation, in an attempt to answer the above paradox and to remain consistent with the basic false premise for his Special Theory (Einstein, Relativity, pp. 21 – 23). Einstein then applied his Lorentz transformation equations to Bradley's empirical and mathematical result, which distorted such result so that it remained consistent with Special Relativity (Chapter 31). In effect, the Lorentz transformations mathematically made the velocity of starlight an absolute and invariant velocity of c, regardless of the Earth's relative orbital velocity of 30 km/s either toward or away from such starlight. Then, with classical circular reasoning, Einstein and his followers claimed that this distortion of Bradley's experiment was an experimental confirmation of Einstein's Special Theory, because it mathematically did away with the paradox[31] (Resnick, 1968, p. 37; and Chapter 36).
What could happen if Bradley's telescope was filled with a different medium than air, vis., water? In 1871, British astronomer George Airy (1801 – 1892) performed a modification of Bradley's earlier aberration experiment. In Airy's experiment the medium of air in the telescope was replaced with the medium of water (Figure 7.7). Paradoxically, this time the starlight appeared to arrive at point E rather than at point D as it did in Bradley's experiment.[32] In spite of these differences, Airy discovered that the angle of aberration of the telescope was exactly the same as when Bradley conducted the experiment with air in the telescope. What was the answer to this paradox (Figure 7.7; Goldberg, pp. 444 – 445)?
In 1810, French scientist Francois Arago (1786 – 1853) also conducted an experiment, which coincidentally was also an attempt to answer our third question. Arago focused his telescope on a nearby star that was low on the horizon and periodically observed it over the course of a year (Goldberg, p. 89; Figure 7.8). He assumed that the solar orbital speed of the Earth toward or away from the star would change the transmission velocity of the starlight received through his telescope; just like the accelerated muzzle velocity of a bullet fired toward a linearly moving carriage will increase or decrease the bullet's relative speed depending upon the linear direction of the carriage's motion[33] (Figures7.1G and 7.1H).
The focus of a telescope's glass lens (a prism) depends upon the bending or refraction of light through the medium of the shaped glass prism toward a focus point. In turn, the magnitude of the bending of light depends upon the transmission velocity of the light through a given glass lens; the faster the transmission velocity of the light through such lens, the less the angle of refraction (bending), and vice-versa[34] (Hoffmann, 1983, pp. 60 – 61; Born, pp. 132 – 133; Figure 6.7D).
Arago also assumed that the above theoretical change in the transmission velocity of light (faster or slower) through the lens would alter the focus of his telescope (Ibid; Goldberg, pp. 89, 438). But paradoxically, the focus of Arago's telescope remained constant. "The refraction of starlight through glass appeared to take place just as though the earth were at rest in the ether" (French, p. 45). In other words, the Earth's orbital speed (v) relative to the velocity of the starlight did not increase or decrease the transmission velocity of light through the glass lens. Arago was mystified by this apparent paradox, and the scientific community still appears to be equally mystified (Coleman, pp. 20 – 22).
The reason that there was no change in the focus was, of course, because the constant transmission velocity of light at c relative to its medium of empty space (a vacuum) does not change when the light ray approaches an object (i.e. Earth) that is moving linearly in either direction. Only the relative time interval of approach (ct – vt or ct + vt) and the distance/time interval of propagation of the transmitting light ray from its light source (the star) to the observer (Arago) changes, depending upon the different linear speeds of the material bodies and the distances involved. When the light ray finally reached the lens of the telescope, its velocity of transmission relative to the medium of air (just prior to entering the lens) remained approximately c and constant.[35] The light ray did not enter the lens with a changed transmission velocity of c – v or c + v as Arago assumed that it would.[36]
Properly analyzed, Arago's experiment really demonstrated that a light ray transmitting through empty space at c has two separate and different velocities: 1) the constant velocity of transmission (300,000 km/s) in the abstract or relative to the medium of the vacuum of empty space (which is an inherent property of such light ray), regardless of the relative linear motions of the material objects toward which it propagates; and 2) a relative velocity or changing time interval of approach over varying distances toward all linearly moving material objects[37] (Figure 21.1). As Figure 7.1 demonstrates, material terrestrial objects with a constant uniform motion also have the same two velocities: 1) a constant velocity of propelled or forced motion with regard to the relatively stationary air and the Earth's surface, and 2) varied velocities of approach or separation relative to every other linearly moving terrestrial object[38] (Figure 21.6).
When Arago's colleague, French scientist Augustin Fresnel (1788 – 1827), was later informed of Arago's puzzling result, he took it upon himself to attempt to construct a quantitative description of the empirical paradox. Fresnel theorized that in Arago's experiment, the ether must have been partially dragged along by the motion of the Earth, and that the magnitude of such "ether drag" depends upon a mathematical equation or coefficient. Goldberg explains Fresnel's reasoning:
"Rather than the relative speed between the earth and the ether being v, Fresnel thought that the relative speed is v (1 + 1/n2), where n is the index of refraction. The function 1 + 1/n2 became known as 'the Fresnel dragging coefficient' and [it] affects the velocity of light in transparent materials such as lens and prisms[39] to compensate exactly for the changes being sought to determine the motion of the earth through the ether"[40] (Goldberg, pp. 89, 90).
In 1818, Fresnel published his empirical formula for the velocity of the moving Earth v′ in the partially dragged along ether: v′ = v (1 – 1/n2)[41] (Born, p. 136; Einstein, Relativity, p. 46, F.N.).
Fresnel's formula does describe the changed transmission velocity of light propagating through a specific moving transparent medium, which depends upon its index of refraction and its relative velocity; but the theoretical motion between the Earth and the mythical ether had nothing to do with it. In effect, when Fresnel backed into his formula, he coincidentally described the correct empirical result, but for the wrong reason. This wrong reason, "ether drag" or something like it, would haunt and distort science for many decades to come, and it still does.
All of the previously described optical experiments are very insightful as to the transmission velocity of light in various contexts, especially if one ignores the false concepts of ether and ether drag. But none of such optical experiments give any indication as to the assumed absolute velocity of the Earth through the stationary ether. All of them, except the 1851 experiment of Fizeau, were designed to demonstrate "first-order effects"…the ratio of v/c (1:10,000), rather than the much more precise "second-order effect" of v2/c2 (1:100,000,000).
E. The Sagnac Effect
In 1913, French scientist Georges Sagnac published the mysterious results of an interference of light experiment which he had conducted[42] (Kelly, pp. 34 – 39). Sagnac placed four mirrors on a disc, one of which was a half-silvered beam splitter (Figure 7.9). A light source on the disc at L sent a beam of monochromatic light to the beam splitter at A. Light pencil 1 propagated straight through the beam splitter A; it was then reflected from mirror B to mirror C and to mirror D. From mirror D, light pencil 1 again propagated straight through the beam splitter and was viewed through a telescope T by a camera at position E on the disc. On the other hand, light pencil 2 was reflected by the beam splitter to mirror D, then to mirror C and B, and finally it propagated through the beam splitter and the telescope to the camera at position E. Focusing mirror B was then adjusted so that the two light pencils were slightly out of phase, and an interference fringe resulted.
The disc with all of the above apparatus on it was then rotated in a clockwise direction at velocity w. As measured by fringe shifts on the rotating disc, it took a longer period of time for light pencil 1 to complete one circuit from A to B to C to D to A in the direction of such rotation, than it took for light pencil 2 to complete one circuit from A to D to C to B to A in the opposite direction.[43] When Sagnac reversed the spin of the disc, he obtained the opposite result.[44] Thus there was a "difference in time (dt) for the light to traverse the [same] path in opposite directions…" (Ibid, p. 35). The results of Sagnac's experiments imply that the velocity of light is not always the same in every direction, and that this contradicts Maxwell's theory of light, Maxwell's equations, and Einstein's second postulate concerning the constancy of velocity c.
What is the explanation for these paradoxical Sagnac Effects? The relativists claim that the Sagnac Effect has nothing to do with Special Relativity because it involves rotation (acceleration) rather than inertial motion (D'Abro, 1950, p. 154), or in the alternative they claim that it is an example of the Relativity of Simultaneity or the Dilation of Time[45] (Kelly, p. 45; Henderson, pp. 113 – 121). Some claim that it can only be explained by General Relativity or by the existence of ether. There are at least 10 other proposed explanations for the above Sagnac Effects, none of which is persuasive (Kelly, p. 61).
The author suggests that such Sagnac Effects can be explained in a similar manner to his explanation for the 1851 Fizeau experiment (see Chapter 7D). The Sagnac experiments are substantially the reverse of the Fizeau Experiment: the light ray is moving but the material medium (air) is substantially stationary. Because of such motion of the light ray toward the air particles more photons interact with more electrons (of air) in the direction of rotation during a given time interval than in the opposite direction where the light ray and its photons are moving relatively away from such electrons. Thus there is more absorption and re-emission of photons in the direction of such motion, and therefore a slightly longer time interval for light to propagate in that direction and a slightly shorter time interval for light to propagate in the direction opposite to such motion.
For the above reasons, the Sagnac Effects (like the Fizeau Effects) are purely physical and empirical effects. They have nothing to do with Special Relativity, and they certainly are not examples of the Relativity of Simultaneity nor the Dilation of Time. Nor can they be considered to be an experimental confirmation of Special Relativity.
In Chapter 9 we will examine the "second-order" Michelson and Morley experiments which were conducted in the 1880's in an attempt to detect and measure the absolute velocity of the Earth through the stationary ether. But first let us analyze one more set of 19th century experiments which have relevance to our future discussions. These are the Doppler effects of sound and light, which we shall briefly discuss in the next chapter.


Home > About the Program > National Advisory Committee > Mark A. Nichter, Ph.D., M.P.H.
Regents Professor and coordinator of the Graduate Medical Anthropology Training Program at the University of Arizona. He received a BA in philosophy and psychology at the George Washington University (1971), a Ph.D. in social anthropology (University of Edinburgh, 1977), a M.P.H. in International Health (Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, 1978), and postdoctoral training in clinically applied anthropology (University of Hawaii, 1980-83). He holds joint appointments in the Departments of Family and Community Medicine and the College of Public Health at the University of Arizona as well as the Arizona Cancer Center. Dr. Nichter has over 30 years of experience conducting health related research in Asia, Africa, and North America and is well known to the global health as well as the tobacco control communities. His most recent research has focused on neglected and emerging diseases, tobacco, and pharmaceutical practice. He is presently the PI on a NIH Fogarty International Center funded project developing culturally appropriate approaches to tobacco cessation in medical schools, clinics and community settings in India and Indonesia. He also coordinates social science research for an UBS Optimus Foundation-funded Buruli Ulcer project in West Africa.
Dr. Nichter is the author of numerous articles in a wide variety of health-related fields and books including Global Health: Why Cultural Perceptions, Social Representations, and Biopolitics Matter (2008). He has extensive experience coordinating transdisciplinary research projects internationally as well as nationally, and served as senior health social science advisor to the International Network of Clinical Epidemiology for over 20 years. Dr. Nichter has been a consultant to several international health and development donor agencies, foundations and organizations including the Ford, UBS Optimus, and Rockefeller foundations, UNICEF and WHO. He has participated on three Institute of Medicine panels focusing on tobacco use among children and complementary and alternative medicine in the United States, and global zoonotic disease surveillance. Dr. Nichter was a core member of the Robert Woods Johnson-funded Tobacco Etiology Research Network.
Dr. Nichter has advised over 30 Ph.D. students in medical anthropology and scores of nurse, medicine, and public health professionals during their academic training. In clinical settings, Dr. Nichter spent years conducting behavioral rounds on the wards modeling interviews in support of patient-centered care. Dr. Nichter has been the recipient of several prestigious awards in the field of anthropology including the Margaret Mead Award, the Society for Medical Anthropology's Career Achievement Award, the Graduate Student Mentor Award, and the Rudolph Virchow Award.


text:
Your guide to what's happening this week in the media, entertainment and technology industry.
Don't miss: IBC365's cyber security webinar
Cyber security and the protection of assets: Join IBC365 and hear from experts at TVT, DPP and Juniper Networks to explore network vulnerabilities, best practices to protect content and ways to manage assets.
The Facebook and Cambridge Analytica scandal continues to unravel, with Facebook's Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg apologising last week and the company's shares continuing to dive. Business Insider expects the situation to deteriorate over the coming week with Zuckerberg potentially testifying about how the social media company handles privacy and data.
The AT&T and Time Warner merger trial commenced last week, with questions raised about the impact it could have on the media industry. The two companies are battling the US Justice Department for the opportunity to give Netflix a run for its money. The decision as to whether the $85 billion deal will go through could be made this week.
26 March AIB Cyber Security Working Group brings together global AIB members to help share information and expertise about the increasing cyber threats to media companies.
27 March The Royal Television Society Republic of Ireland Annual General Meeting, taking place in RTÉ AR4, chaired by Charles Byrne.
30 March Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE) will be holding an open meeting of its Russian section exploring "Organisation of long-term storage of digital audio-visual materials". Delegates will gather in Moscow to discuss the issues related to the storage issue for audiovisual works and approach problem-solving techniques.
Film and TV releases
Steven Spielberg's Ready Player One will hit cinemas Friday. The film is a 1980s-themed adaption of Ernest Cline's cult novel and is reported to be Spielberg's first feature film to have big box office potential in the Chinese market.
The Zen Diaries of Garry Shandling, HBO's documentary on the beloved comedian who died unexpectantly in 2016, will be available on demand from Tuesday 27 March. Created by Judd Apatow, it features more than 40 conversations with Shandling's family and friends including Jim Carrey, Sacha Baron Cohen, Jay Leno and Jerry Seinfeld.
Netflix's miniseries on Donald Trump, Trump: An American Dream will be released Friday 30 March exploring the extraordinary and unique life of the US President.
Wes Anderson's latest feature film, Isle of Dogs is set in Japan and follows a boys' odyssey in search of his lost dog. It is in theatres in the UK Friday 30 March.
31 March 1997 Channel 5 began broadcasting in the UK.
Read more CTO Series: Interview with Paul Cheesbrough, 21st Century Fox
IBC2022 Day 2 Recap: Nonny de la Pena, Metaverse, Disney AI
Here's what happened on Day 2 of IBC2022, as the IBC Conference continued and speakers talked about subjects ranging from AI to the Metaverse.
IBC Accelerators 2022 (Part 3): Innovation everywhere
The IBC 2022 Accelerator programme aims to support the media & entertainment industry to solve some of the biggest challenges in the market today, and this final cluster of projects is taking on some of the most diverse and complex of the lot.
Streaming vs cinema: What does the future hold for film?
Back in 2019, Netflix released data claiming that 45 million accounts – nearly a third of its total subscribers – had streamed the Sandra Bullock thriller Bird Box in its first week on the platform, a record for a Netflix film.


The Porsche 911 has long been the measuring stick for what a sports car should be. Now the BMW i8 has come along with its hybrid drivetrain and it has its eyes set on taking down the King.
But is what represents the future of the sports car anywhere near the tried and true past? On paper the i8 from a cost and performance stand point matches up closely in specs to the 911 Carrera 4 GTS, but does it in the real world?
Click past the jump (or scroll down if you came directly to the full article) to see a video of how the two compare.
The BMW i8 is an impressive car with its advanced technology and concept car styling. However it is hard to beat the sound of a flat-six with a smaller engine and electric motors.
In this video evo takes the i8 and 911 and puts them against each other in a track battle. It first gives you the driving impressions of both cars and then shows the laps of each side by side. Do you think the Porsche will keep its place at the top of the hill or will the BMW show that the future is better than the past?


Why it is critically necessary to be bolder? Bold movements are really the things that challenge and comfort our mildness. Is your church going mild? Is it bold? Dr. Tom Cheyney gives practical advice and ways to move your church from mild to bold.


How do we follow-up in a way that's meaningful to our prospect?
In this week's episode of The Sales Playbook Podcast we go there!
Right click this link to download this episode or click on the handy dandy audio player below.
How do you gently guide your contact from prospect to client?
This is webinar #2 of only 4 live webinars I will be doing this year and unfortunately it WON'T be offered again.


YEVAMOS 5 - generously sponsored by Lee and Marsha Weinblatt of Teaneck, N.J. -- may Hashem protect them and all that is theirs!
1) EXPOUNDING "SEMUCHIN" TO TEACH "ASEH DOCHEH LO TA'ASEH"
QUESTION: The Gemara discusses the source for the principle of "Aseh Docheh Lo Ta'aseh" at length. It proposes that the source that an Aseh is Docheh a Lo Ta'aseh is derived from the proximity of the prohibition of wearing Kil'ayim with the command to make Tzitzis for one's garment. The proximity (Semuchin) of those two verses teaches that one may place threads of wool in a garment of linen in order to make Tzitzis, the Mitzvas Aseh of Tzitzis thereby being Docheh the Lo Ta'aseh of Kil'ayim.
The Gemara concludes that this is a valid source for "Aseh Docheh Lo Ta'aseh" according to d'Vei Rebbi Yishmael. According to d'Vei Rebbi Yishmael, there is an extra phrase in the verse of Kil'ayim which gives us license to apply Semuchin and to learn that the Aseh of Tzitzis is Docheh the Lo Ta'aseh of Kil'ayim. According to the Rabanan, however, there is no extra phrase (because they require the phrase "Tzemer u'Pishtim" to teach that the Isur of Kil'ayim applies only to a mixture of wool and linen and not to any other mixture). Hence the Gemara asks that according to the Rabanan, what is the source for the principle of "Aseh Docheh Lo Ta'aseh," since we can only apply Semuchin if there is an extra phrase.
What is the Gemara's question? Only Rebbi Yehudah requires that there be an extra phrase ("Mufneh") in order to expound Semuchin -- the Rabanan who argue with d'Vei Rebbi Yishmael can simply hold like the Rabanan who argue with Rebbi Yehudah and do not require an extra phrase in order to expound Semuchin!
(a) TOSFOS (DH l'Rabanan) says that the Gemara is just asking this question to cover all possibilities, just in case the Rabanan hold like Rebbi Yehudah.
(b) The RITVA (and ME'IRI) answers that the Rabanan -- who argue with Rebbi Yehudah and apply Semuchin even when there is no extra phrase -- do not go so far as to extend the law derived from Semuchin to other cases through a Binyan Av, unless there is an extra phrase. When there is no extra phrase, the law derived through Semuchin applies only to the specific case mentioned in the verse, and cannot be applied to other cases.
(c) TOSFOS HA'ROSH in the name of RABEINU MEIR explains that even if the Rabanan hold that we do expound Semuchin, perhaps in this case the Semuchin does not teach us that one is able to put Tzitzis of wool on a garment on linen. Perhaps according to the Rabanan (who do not rule that any time the verse says "Beged" it refers to Tzemer and Pishtim only) the Semuchin teaches a different Halachah altogether -- the Halachah of Rava, that Tzitzis of wool or linen may be used for a garment of any material (while Tzitzis made of any other material may only be used for a garment made of the same material), but Tzitzis of linen may not be used for a garment of wool, but only for a garment of linen (or another non-wool material).
2) THE TEACHING OF THE VERSE OF "ROSHO"
QUESTION: The Gemara cites the verse, "Rosho" ("On the seventh day he shall shave off all of his hair, [and the hair of] *his head*") (Vayikra 14:9), and says that it teaches that the Mitzvas Aseh for a Metzora to shave his hair is Docheh the Lo Ta'aseh of cutting off the hair of the corners of one's head ("Hakafas ha'Rosh"). The Gemara suggests that this is the source for the principle of "Aseh Docheh Lo Ta'aseh." The Gemara (5b) concludes that there is another source for "Aseh Docheh Lo Ta'aseh" -- the verses that teach that the Mitzvas Aseh of Tzitzis is Docheh the Lo Ta'aseh of Kil'ayim.
(a) TOSFOS (DH Mah l'Lav) answers that the verse of "Rosho" is needed to teach another Halachah, and not the Halachah of "Aseh Docheh Lo Ta'aseh." It teaches that shaving the entire head is considered "Hakafah" ("Hakafas ha'Rosh Shmei Hakafah") and it would have been prohibited had it not been for the Mitzvas Aseh.
(b) Alternatively, without the verse of "Rosho," we might have thought that the second verse quoted by the Gemara, the verse of "Zekano," is not referring to the Mitzvah of a Kohen who was a Metzora to shave his hair, but rather it is referring to a regular person who was a Metzora, and it is not teaching a new Halachah of "Aseh Docheh Lo Ta'aseh va'Aseh" in the case of a Kohen. We might have thought that the verse of "Zekano" is talking about a case where there is only a Lo Ta'aseh, and thus the Aseh is certainly Docheh the Lo Ta'aseh, and it is not talking about a case where there is both an Aseh and a Lo Ta'aseh not to shave. However, now that we have the verse of "Rosho," we know that "Zekano" is referring to the case of a Kohen Metzora, and it is teaching that an Aseh is Docheh both an Aseh and a Lo Ta'aseh.
3) A POTENTIAL SOURCE FOR "ASEH DOCHEH LO TA'ASEH SHE'YESH BO KARES"
QUESTION: The Gemara searches for a source for the principle that "Aseh Docheh Lo Ta'aseh she'Yesh Bo Kares." Since we find that the Torah went out of its way, in the case of Tzitzis made from Kil'ayim, to specifically teach that an Aseh is Docheh a normal Lo Ta'aseh (one that does not have Kares), we should be able to infer that an Aseh is *not* Docheh a Lo Ta'aseh that has Kares! Why does the Gemara attempt to prove that an Aseh *is* Docheh a Lo Ta'aseh that has Kares, when we apparently have evidence that it is *not* Docheh a Lo Ta'aseh that has Kares?
(a) TOSFOS (6a, middle of DH Ta'ama) explains that we might have thought that perhaps the verse of Tzitzis does not teach that an Aseh is Docheh a Lo Ta'aseh. The verse might be teaching the Halachah of Rava, that it is permitted to use Tzitzis of wool or linen for a garment of any type of material (according to the Rabanan, and for both woolen and linen garments according to Rebbi Yishmael, who holds that only those garments are obligated in Tzitzis.) Without the verse, one would have thought that Tzitzis must be made of the same material from which the garment is made. That is why the Gemara thought that perhaps we do not expound the verse of Tzitzis with regard to Aseh Docheh Lo Ta'aseh. Thus, we are free to find another source that says that an Aseh is Docheh a Lo Ta'aseh that has Kares.


With the help of a local winery, the Wildlife Safari in Winston, Ore. made a little history this weekend.
The tents were set up at the elephant barn, because not even the rain could stop this party. Underneath the big top was gourmet food local wines and of course the main attractions: two African Elephants.
While Alice entertained the guests, George was behind the barn warming up for his big moment. For the first time in North America, an elephant was used to stomp grapes for wine.


text:
CIE Components in Electronics
Interviews & Comments
ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY AWARDS 2021 OPEN FOR ENTRIES
New Virtual 3D E-Stop Switch Configuration Tool
ODU-MAC RAPID – Saves time during assembly
TraceParts and SnapEDA Partner to Offer Unified UX to Source Free PCB Footprints, Schematic Symbols & 3D MCAD Models
Wireless & Communications
Digi-Key Electronics Announces New Marketplace Global Distribution Partnership with LogiSwitch
NXP Announces the BlueBox 3.0 Development Platform for Safe Automotive High-Performance Computing
Estonians will provide stereo cameras to Maxar Technologies for NASA's Artemis lunar program
December/January
December / January
July / August
European affiliate of Sun Capital Partners acquires electromechanical switch maker, C&K Holdings
September 25, 2017	News 2,105 Views
An affiliate of both Sun Capital Partners, Inc. ("Sun Capital") and Sun European Partners, LLP ("Sun European Partners") has announced that it has acquired C&K Holdings, Inc. ("C&K" or the "Company"), one of the world's most trusted brands of high-quality electromechanical switches. Terms of the private transaction were not disclosed.
C&K was founded in 1928 and has one of the industry's broadest product portfolios, offering more than 55,000 standard products and 8.5 million switch combinations to companies that design, manufacture and distribute electronics products. In addition, the company's unmatched custom design capabilities are recognised globally by engineers who demand reliable switch performance.
The company is headquartered in Newton, Massachusetts, with more than 1,500 employees working at its global design centres in Newton, Dole, France, and Huizhou, China. C&K delivers reliable, cost-effective and high-quality electromechanical switches to more than 20,000 customers in the industrial, automotive, aerospace, medical, consumer products, transportation and telecom industries.
"We are looking forward to partnering with the management team and providing advice and guidance in their efforts to expand the Company's growth and market share," said Marc Leder, co-CEO of Sun Capital. "This transaction highlights Sun Capital's global investment presence, and we're excited about the opportunity ahead."
Jerome Nomme, managing director at Sun European Partners said: "We are excited by the high potential of this investment. The electromechanical switch market is estimated to be worth €6 billion globally and is highly fragmented. We believe C&K can improve its strong market position and cement its status as the manufacturer of choice in the sector. We look forward to working with C&K in their efforts to accelerate the Company's profitable growth."
John Boucher, CEO at C&K added: "Partnering with Sun European Partners is an important milestone for C&K. Their investment is strong recognition of both the tremendous growth and success we've experienced – and agreement that our market leadership and unique capabilities have us positioned for future success. By combining our strengths with Sun's, we gain the opportunity to expand into new markets and add even more innovative switch products to our existing portfolio."
Sun Capital and Sun European Partners have significant experience in the engineered industrial products space through affiliated portfolio companies including Aclara, a world-class supplier of smart infrastructure solutions (SIS) to water, gas, and electric utilities globally; Flexitech, the leading global designer and supplier of high quality brake hose products for the automotive industry; and Flabeg, a tier-2 auto supplier of glass products.
The sale process was managed by Lincoln International and Sun European Partners was advised by Kirkland & Ellis, Ernst & Young and DLA Piper. Tikehau provided the acquisition financing.
www.suneuropeanpartners.com
Today TraceParts, a provider of 3D digital content for engineering, and SnapEDA, the creators of …
© Copyright 2021, Components in Electronics. Specialist Business Media Limited. All rights reserved.
Registered Office: © Datateam Business Media, 15a London Road, Maidstone, Kent ME16 8LY. United Kingdom
This site uses cookies in order to function properly and to allow us to improve our service. You can learn more about our cookies, their use and how to disable them on our Cookie Page. More information can also be found about our website within our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions. Remove this message


text:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"
"http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">

<title>Minim : : MoogFilter.Type : : BP</title>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<link href="stylesheet.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css">

    	Minim

    		core |
    		ugens |
    		analysis

MoogFilter.Type

BP

Description

    	The value representing band pass.

Signature

MoogFilter.Type BP

Related

    	type

Example

None available

Usage

    	Web & Application

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


In 2012, Sacaton Middle School (SMS) students Carlos Peña and Clay Jackson's passion for robots began a movement that would eventually spawn the school's Robotics STEM Club, a club that has exploded in popularity and now numbers 69 members.
The club lets students tinker with and program different types of robots to accomplish a specific goal, like the "Maze" challenge where students must map out the length their robot vehicle travels and the angle at which it turns to properly navigate a wooden maze. Other challenges include flying drones through obstacle courses, robot jousting, the alpine climb and more.
JoEllen Kinnamon, SMS science teacher and club founder said, while club members may appear to be just playing with toys, they are in fact learning math and science in a real world setting.
If you give a student a mathematics problem sheet and ask them to solve it, the students will sometimes sit there, look at the sheet and sigh, she said.
"Now you take these [math] problems and say, you can do them here [at the club], it's fun here…you [can] understand it here and now," said Kinnamon.
This style of hands on learning has been successful in attracting the attention of SMS students all-the-while teaching them the fundamentals of physics, geometry, and engineering.
While learning math and science is the club's main focus, preparing for a highly competitive international robotics competition called RoboRAVE, is the incentive that keeps the students energized.
The robotics competition, which began in 2001 and is being held this year at the Albuquerque Convention Center in Albuquerque, N.M. from May 5-7, is the end goal for club members.
This year the club plans on making their mark on RoboRAVE and has been working hard since Sept., honing their skills and knowledge up to four times a week.
The club meets every Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and lasts 1 ½ hours, said Kinnamon. We also have a club meeting every other Saturday from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. and typically see around 50 students who come in and work with the robots, she said.
And while educating the students and incentivizing them to move forward with their education is the goal of the club, for Kinnamon, its seeing the students' faces light up when they first see the twinkling lights of Albuquerque on their way to the RoboRAVE competition, it's the tears of joy in the parents' eyes as they watch their child figure out complex problems.
"I had one grandmother last year, every time their [grandchild] crossed the board on the maze, she just picked them up and swung them around. She was more into it than the kids. What a great experience to see that," said Kinnamon.
For more information about the club contact JoEllen Kinnamon by email at jkinnamon@sacatonschools.org or call (520) 562-8600.


Shipping:Price: we sell at our wholesale price to support more small customers.
However, more quantity, better quotation. Please feel free to contact us.
– Item(s) will be checked carefully before delivery.
– Item(s) will be packed in very well condition.
– Declaring lower value can be made upon request.
– If there are two orders from your side, we will combine them together and packing goods together.
– You will be notified by email with any updates.
Our tubes is Made from high tensile and modulus unidirectional carbon fiber (Toray) based on vinyl-ester resin(Epoxy available upon request) . And it is with Superior quality and extremely smooth finish .
We are in this field for more than 10years.


text:
Q: Python: Simple question about comparing multiple arguments in a function (updated) I'm trying to work out how to check the input with multiple strings
Example, a football quiz, here the answer is 2003-2004
guess1 = input('which years did Arsenal go unbeaten?')
   check_guess(guess1, '2003-2004')

but what about if I want to say both 2003 or 2004 are correct? I add 'or' in
but it doesn't work, it will only accept the first string of 2003, how to i make it to accept either string?
    guess1 = input('which years did Arsenal go unbeaten?')
    check_guess(guess1, '2003') or check_guess(guess1, '2004')

Here's the full script
#This is a football quiz
def check_guess(guess, answer):
  global score
  still_guessing = True
  attempt = 0
  while still_guessing and attempt < 3:
      if guess.lower() == answer.lower():
          print('You smarty-pants!, correct answer!')
          score = score + 1
          still_guessing = False
      else:
          if attempt < 2:
              guess = input('You dilly, wrong answer. Try again.')
          attempt = attempt + 1
  if attempt == 3:
      print('This was your last chance, Pal, the correct answer is ' + answer)

score = 0
print('Football quiz!')
guess1 = input('Between which years did Arsenal go unbeaten?')
check_guess(guess1, '2003-2004')
guess2 = input("What is the score of Arsenal's record win against Grimbsy town?")
check_guess(guess2, '9-1')
guess3 = input("Which year marked Arsenal's final game at Highbury?")
check_guess(guess3, '2006')
guess4 = input('Which country won the first ever fifa football world cup in 1930?')
check_guess(guess4, 'Uruguay')
guess5 = input('Who is the top scorer of Arsenal in all time?')
check_guess(guess5, 'Henry')
guess6 = input('How many goals did he score for Arsenal?')
check_guess(guess6, '228')
print('Your score is ' + str(score))

Thanks.

A: Define your function like this :)
def check_guess(year):
    if year in ['2003','2004']:
        return True
    return False

A: Guess this should do what you want:
def check_guess(year):
    if ('2003' in year) or ('2004' in year):
        return True
    return False

guess1 = input('which years did Arsenal go unbeaten?')
check_guess(guess1)

A: You can make the function do what you want and keep it stateless with the following code

// Takes in a guess in format 'YYYY' E.G `2003`
// Takes in arbitrary amount of years in format `YYYY,YYYY,...`
def check_guess(guess, valid_years):
    list_of_years= valid_years.split(',')

    if guess in list_of_years:
        return True
    return False

Recomended: You can change the - delimiter used to , since the - delimiter is usually used to specify a range. and if you want to add that behaviour it wouldn't be needed to change usages of this function

A: You could do the following:
def check_guess(guess, years):
    return guess in years

You can use this function in an if-block to execute code only if the guess is right:
if check_guess(guess1, ['2003','2004']):
    # ...

Alternatively, you could just use an if statement with an or like so:
if (guess1 == '2003') or (guess1 == '2004'):
    # ...

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Alex Ligertwood uses TITANIUM and LaGrange Guitar Cables and the M5 Microphone Cable.
Most will be familiar with his voice from his work with Santana – but Scottish-born Alex Ligertwood had long been a feted member of top bands beforehand.
Invited to join Jeff Beck's band in the early 70s, he also played with Brian Auger, the Average White Band and Troc before joining Santana in 1979 and remaining with them – with interruptions – until 1994.
Ligertwood's inspiration comes from the world of soul music; as a fledgling singer, he took the voices and phrasing of Ray Charles, Sam Cooke, Otis Redding and Marvin Gaye as his models.
Now a legend in his own right, Alex Ligertwood still has a personal style that reflects these early influences.
In 1985 Alex Ligertwood and colleagues from Santana joined forces in R.O.A.R. and landed a respectable hit in "We Gotta Do It".
He also played with Ben E. King and Carly Simon and moved into jazz rock with the David Garfield Band, Jeff Lorber, The Dixie Dregs and Spyro Gyra.
Alex Ligertwood also formed a songwriting team with keyboarder Richard Baker, including the Keith Olsen-produced numbers "One and Only Love" und "All the Way".
After a lifetime on the road, he now lives in Santa Monica, California, and France. He joined up with his old colleagues from Troc in 2010, and has made occasional appearances in Germany with Santana tribute band The Magic of Santana (also part of the #KLOTZfamily!).


s a Washington Post editorial board member and op-ed columnist. A finalist for the 2009 Pulitzer Prize in editorial writing, he was the Post's Supreme Court correspondent prior to joining the editorial board. As editor of The New Republic, he took action against the journalistic fraud of Stephen Glass, events recounted in the 2003 film Shattered Glass. He has also worked as a foreign correspondent in Europe and Latin America. He is the author of two previous books. His latest book is Freedom's Detective, now available.


If you are trying to lose weight, the best way to do it is to exercise and reduce your calories. The best exercises are lifting with free weights. The best way to reduce your calories is to simply eat less or implement intermittent fasting. Forget the diet books and other fad diets, they are just meant to sell you something. Once you nailed exercise and reducing your calories, you can dive into the supplement world and experiment with thermogenic fat burners. Thermogenic fat burners are supplements that increase heat in the body and that in turn will increase your metabolism which will help you burn more calories. The more calories you "burn", the more your body will start to use its own fat for energy. But this will ONLY happen if you consume LESS calories than you expend per day. That is why the best way to lose fat is to combine exercise, reduced calories and the best thermogenic fat burner you can buy.
Thermogenesis is when the body increases its temperature and then its metabolism naturally increases. When one's body metabolism increases more calories are burned and fat cells use this as an energy source. Lipolysis is when the body breaks down fat before it can be used as energy, and this is how you lose bodyfat.
Being a supplement expert I can make my recommendations on which are the best thermogenic fat burners in 2018. You can find many websites that talk about the best thermogenics, but most of them are trying to sell you one and confuse you by name brands instead of ingredients. Technically you want to do both. Therefore I look at the raw thermogenic ingredients and the brands that are using them. Then I tell you where you can buy them and how to use them. This way you can be sure you're getting the best thermogenic fat burners on the market.
BTW. If you're looking for the best thermogenic for women look no further. This top ranked list applies to all humans. It does not matter if you are a man or a woman when it comes to a thermogenic fat burner. Additionally, all of these thermogenic supplements are made for weight loss.
I ranked caffeine LAST in my list of the best thermogenic fat burners because caffeine is not a supplement, it is a drug. However supplement companies will use caffeine over and over again in their thermogenic fat burners because of it's addicting side effects. In addition, they use it because the consumer "feels" it. And when the consumer "feels" it, they think it is "working". However, the side effects of caffeine far outweigh the thermogenic effects. Caffeine releases cortisol in the body which wastes muscle mass and increases fat storage. If you must use caffeine I would only use sparing and not everyday. For example you would not stack a pre workout supplement containing caffeine with a fat burner containing caffeine. In some cases, this would give you a dose of over 500mg of caffeine. Not good! If you have been wondering why you cannot lose weight, but mean while you're going to the gym and eating right, most likely you're using high doses of caffeine on a daily basis. And most likely you have been doing this year after year. If you find yourself where you cannot go 1 day without coffee, well your an addict and your body is getting blasted with increased cortisol daily.
6. Fucoxanthin. Fucoxanthin is a brown seaweed extract. It is a marine carotenoid found in edible seaweeds with the alternative name of wakame. In this study, fucoxanthin was found to reduce white adipose tissue which is commonly found in stomach fat in men and women. This study was done on mice keep in mind.
Fucoxanthin supplements have been around for about 4 years and nobody is really going crazy over this ingredients. However I believe that is because most of the thermogenic fat burners that do contain fucoxanthin are underdosed and / or contain cheap Chinese made versions. If you want to use fucoxanthin as a non-stimulant thermogenic fat burner you have to by a supplement with FucoPure brand fucoxanthin. Fucopure is actually patented. So if you do not get this brand, most likely you are not getting fucoxanthin at all.
The dose was 150 mg twice daily.
Here is the brand of African mango extract you should buy if you want to use the ingredient that was used in the study. The brand is WellTrim and is patented.
Here is a brand of African Mango that is most likely generic, synthetic, and inferior to the WellTrim brand above. This is typical in the supplement industry and what I like to call the bait and switch. They bait you by using African mango, but then sell you a low-quality version of the product. Why use this brand, when you could use the patented version? Always use the ingredients that are patented and the ones that were actually used in the studies.
This supplement has been around for nearly 20 years but the studies behind it promoting it as a thermogenic product are fairly strong. The first study was done in 1999.
Then in 2008 another study was performed backing up the study above proving that green tea extract is an effective thermogenic fat burner.
Now if you want to use any of these thermogenic fat burners, you have to be very careful with the dosages that the studies used. In the study above, the researchers used about 400mg to 800 mg. However it is important to note that again, as I mentioned above, you do not want to use cheap generic green tea extract. The best green tea extract to use is a brand called Teavigo, which has a patented tied to it.
7 Keto DHEA is a patented thermogenic ingredient from Lonza. It has been around for over 20 years. The ingredient has changed owners numerous times. In 2007 it received a patent. It works by supporting an increase in fat burning enzymes in the body, which in turn encourages the body to burn fat more efficiently.
It has 4 published clinical studies. 100mg is needed twice a day. Being that it is patented you want to make sure you buy the correct brand. Here is the brand that I recommend.
Bitter orange otherwise known as Citrus Aurantium increases thermogenesis by stimulating the beta-3 receptors in the body. When the beta-3 receptors are stimulated, thermogenesis is increased. Numerous studies show that bitter orange extract is a potent thermogenic supplement. Here is a good abstract in which the authors come to the conclusion that bitter orange extract increase thermogenesis.
Like all the ingredients I mentioned above you want to make sure that you get the highest quality citrus aurantium you can buy. Kinetiq is the branded and patented citrus aurantium to buy. It used to be called Advantra Z, but I believe the company that owned Advantra Z sold the company and the new company renamed it Kinetiq, along with increasing the quality of the ingredient.
This is my #1 choice for the best thermogenic fat burner. The capsaicinoids found naturally in cayenne peppers has been shown in numerous studies to increase thermogenesis. However one simply cannot just start swallowing cayenne peppers in hopes that it will burn fat. If you do that most likely you'll get major stomach discomfort. Instead, a company called Omni actives manufacturers a capsaicinoid powder that is specifically made not to cause discomfort or stimulate the heart. This brand of cayenne pepper extract is called Capsimax.
Additionally, no difference was noted in heart rate or blood pressure between placebo and Capsimax, thus supporting its safety, he says.
This ingredient is probably the most abused by supplement companies that claim they use it but only put in a trace amount. The recommended serving size of Capsimax is 150 mg. Most supplement companies only put in 10m to 50 mg.
In conclusion, there is no magic pill when it comes to weight loss. Do not think for a second that you can take any of these thermogenic fat burners and the fat will begin to melt off, it will not. Why do you think there are some many fat loss supplement out there to begin with? Becaue most of them do not work. A person buys one brand because of the reviews he or she read on Amazon.com, does not work, so they buy another brand and the cycle goes on and on and on. As I mentioned above, most of the thermogenic ingredients that I listed here are over 20 years old! For some reason, new fat loss ingredients and fat burners are not being invented any more. So the consumer is stuck with using ingredients that are 20 years old. But if you're smart and buy single ingredient supplements instead of proprietary blends you can determine which thermogenic ingredient works for you and wish one does not.
My recommendation is to stack a 2 or three together. Something like Capsimax, Kinetiq, and Teavigo. Then, of course, lift weights, stay away from caffeine, and eat a good diet. Try intermittent fasting as well, as I believe this is the best way to lose weight. Going on diets, eating special foods, or following some "diet book" is a sure path to failure. Losing weight on paper is easy. Losing weight, in reality, is difficult because believe it or not, food is highly addicting. Most people that are overweight have a drinking problem, sugar problem, caffeine addiction, artificial sweetener addiction, or fried food problem.


The Canadian sensation was on fire.
Brandon "Dashy" Otell missed OpTic Gaming's first seven matches in the CWL Pro League, but the Canadian phenom took little time to remind fans why he is one of the best players in the world.
OpTic's return match in the CWL Pro League was a cross-divisional meeting with Division B's Enigma6, who came into the match with a 3-4 record. OpTic was able to start the series off strong, winning the opening Hardpoint by 61 points behind Dashy's 34 kills.
E6 took game two, Hacienda Search and Destroy, by a score of 6-2, evening the series at one map each. And with some momentum on their side after the Search and Destroy victory, E6 dominated OpTic on Frequency Control. In fact, Dashy was the only OpTic player to reach 10 kills, and he was also the only one to finish with a positive kill-death ratio.
Dashy wasn't going to let his team drop to 4-4, though. On Frequency Hardpoint, Dashy finished with a game-high 34 kills in a complete dismantling of E6 that saw OpTic win by more than 160 points.
In the final map of the series, Payload Search and Destroy, it was three-time world champion Damon "Karma" Barlow that shined. Leading the lobby with 10 kills, OpTic ran through E6 in just seven rounds to secure their fifth victory of the regular season.
In the other matches today, Splyce defeated a Midnight Esports team that was making their CWL Pro League debut. Gen.G also beat Denial Esports in four games, and 100 Thieves kept their strong play up with a 3-0 sweep against Team Reciprocity.
Arguably the most interesting match tomorrow will be Splyce vs. Gen.G, who will face off at 6:30pm CT. The opening match of the day will be OpTic Gaming vs. Denial Esports, which will kick off at 2pm CT.


I find that there is a mix between good and bad financial innovations, although on balance I find more good ones than bad ones. Individually and collectively, these innovations have improved access to credit, made life more convenient, and in some cases probably allowed the economy to grow faster. But some innovations (notably, CDOs and Structured Investment Vehicles, or SIVs) were poorly designed, while others were misused (CDS, adjustable rate mortgages or ARMs, and home equity lines of credit or HELOCs) and contributed to the financial crisis and/or amplified the downturn in the economy when it started.
I haven't read the full paper yet, but in the bloggy tradition of tossing out provocative material to see what other smart people have to say about it, here is Litan's summary table of what's good and what's bad in financial innovation. For now, I'll just note that aside from the rise of venture capital, which wasn't a Wall Street phenomenon, there's not a single innovation in the investment arena that Litan scores as a productivity enhancer. (Securitization gets a positive score, but that's provisional on it being "restructured by the market and/or policymakers.") That's pretty damning coming from a guy who's obviously pretty sympathetic to innovation. Other comments welcome.


text:
Ouinhi  is a town, arrondissement, and commune in the Zou Department of south-western Benin. The commune covers an area of 483 square kilometres and as of 2013 had a population of 59,381 people.
It is bounded on the north-west by the commune of Zagnanado, south-west by the commune of Zogbodomey, south by the commune of Bonou and east by the commune of Adja-Ouèrè. The commune is divided into arrondissements which include Dasso, Ouinhi, and Tohu, comprising 28 villages.

The arrondissements of Ouinhi and Dasso were struck hard by the 2008 Benin floods in July 2008, tearing down mud and straw homes and infrastructure and polluting rivers.

References

External links
Communes du Benin

Communes of Benin
Arrondissements of Benin
Populated places in the Zou Department
Communes in Yorubaland

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


I have a 1917 eddystone action, its been opened up to a magnum bolt face. The bolt is pitted pretty good, but it is safe and functional.
Heres my dilemna. If I keep it the way it is I would probably throw on a 375 bbl and make more of a truck rifle. Now the other thought I have is to find a different bolt with the original boltface in better shape (cosmetically) and go with a 35whelen. (anybody got a bolt for a eddystone laying around????).
Now I'm not a smith but if the magazine is set up for a magnum will there be feeding problems if I go with the shorter whelen?
If I go with the 375, I'm looking at a 21" bbl and want to shoot 275-300gr bullets. What twist would be the best?
Same question on if I go with the whelen. 200-225gr bullets around the same bbl length.


text:
Bunker Labs
Minneapolis, MN • We help veteran entrepreneurs and military spouses find the quickest route to a successful business
Bunker Labs is a nonprofit professional association focused on education. With $185k in revenue and 7 employees, it is a relatively small organization. Founded in 2016, Bunker Labs is headquartered in Minneapolis, MN. In recent tax filings, the organization reported expenses of $194k.
1Donation
$50Raised so far
Donated 2 months ago
Help Bunker Labs grow by spreading the word or creating a fundraising campaign. If you work for the nonprofit, claim this page to share your story.
Make a donation to Bunker Labs as a gift. Add a custom message and download a beautiful PDF.
Work for Bunker Labs? Claim this page to update your profile in minutes.
To catalyze the entrepreneurial potential of the military experience to lead innovation in the American economy and to empower veterans as leaders in innovation.
Bunker Labs assisted entrepreneurs who are veterans of the military.
From Bunker Labs's website
Whether you are exploring a new career path after active duty service, starting a business or growing your business—building your network is critical.
Bunker Labs invites veterans, business leaders, entrepreneurs, investors, and subject matter experts to get plugged into their local entrepreneurial ecosystem through our monthly Bunker Brews meet ups in each of our chapter cities. Currently in over 30 cities around the country, Bunker Labs also offers the veteran entrepreneur community access to a national community as well!
Below are some organizations that may be similar to Bunker Labs.
Finnegans Community Fund
Minneapolis, MN • Founded in 2000, Minneapolis-based FINNEGANS was the first beer company in the world to donate 100% of its profits to hunger alleviation charities where its Irish Amber or Blonde Ale are sold.
Coffee Bunker
Tulsa, OK • At the Coffee Bunker veterans can make connections with other veterans, representatives from other veteran organizations, resource people related to employment and education, and others who can facilitate transition to civilian life.
Oregon RAIN
Eugene, OR • Oregon RAIN is building the entrepreneurial ecosystem in Oregon by connecting entrepreneurs to people, programs, physical resources, and capital.
Combined Arms
Houston, TX • Combined Arms is a nonprofit that connects transitioning veterans with services, community and purpose to accelerate their impact in Houston, Texas
Top causes in Minneapolis
Your donation will be made to a donor advised fund at Philanthropic Ventures Foundation (PVF), a 501(c)3 public charity, EIN 94-3136771, with a recommendation that PVF make a corresponding grant to Bunker Labs. ALMA works with PVF in order to facilitate donations to charities. Please see our Terms of Use and FAQs to learn more about the donation process.


text:
J.D., University of Illinois College of Law (summa cum laude)
B.A., Grinnell College
United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois
United States District Court, Northern District of Indiana
United States Court of Federal Claims
Chicago Bar Association
Women's Bar Association of Illinois
Serbian Bar Association of America
Nada Djordjevic, Associate
Email: ndjordjevic@bffb.com
Based in the firm's Chicago office, Ms. Djordjevic's practice focuses on class action litigation and complex commercial litigation matters throughout the United States. She has represented clients in class action lawsuits involving deceptive insurance sales practices, data breaches, false and deceptive advertising, unfair business practices in connection with various consumer products including cosmetics, vitamin supplements, over-the-counter drugs, and other consumer claims. Ms. Djordjevic also has experience litigating complex business disputes, cases involving professional malpractice, breach of contract, and insurance coverage; white collar cases, bankruptcy matters, probate matters, U.C.C. disputes; and wage and hour claims.
Ms. Djordjevic received her B.A. in Sociology from Grinnell College in 1996. Ms. Djordjevic received her J.D. from the University of Illinois College of Law in 2002, graduating summa cum laude, and Order of the Coif.
Ms. Djordjevic was admitted to the Illinois Bar in 2002. Ms. Djordjevic is also admitted to practice before the Illinois Supreme Court, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, and the United States Court of Federal Claims.
Privacy Policy | Disclaimer | Opportunities


2013 and 2014 have been big years for animal rights. Sweeping animal testing bans are taking the cruelty out of the beauty industry, but one country is shamefully missing from this list.
It seems like animal testing is becoming passe in the beauty industry as states and countries across the globe place bans on this cruel and unnecessary practice.
1. São Paulo – The state of São Paulo, Brazil banned animal testing for cosmetic research. The ban is going to impact around 1/3 of the 2300 cosmetics companies in Brazil and is hopefully the first step toward a nation-wide ban.
2. European Union – A national ban on animal testing in the cosmetics industry took effect in the EU on March 11th, 2013.
3. India – India has banned animal testing on all cosmetics products, including imports.
4. Israel – Animal-tested products are no longer allowed to be produced or sold in Israel.
See any country that's glaringly missing on this list? The U.S. is falling far behind in protecting animal rights. That's right – states and countries in the developed and developing world are getting rid of the superfluous practice, while the U.S. continues to allow animal testing.
The worst part? Animal testing doesn't actually give us a lot of information about a product's safety for humans.
Wool is Green? What this campaign leaves out.


This adjustable source was found in a 1979 documentation, but all components are still common today. The integrated circuit must be mounted on a heat radiator and the transformer has a 1 A secondary. The output voltage is set to P1. The transformer must have a secondary 15 + 15 V with a 1 A current.


It took 18 months to complete in sharp contrast to Nepali movies these days that, get packed up within one-two months of shooting. The movie "I am Sorry" is an important movie to determine the future of its actors, actress, script writer and the director in their film career. The movie featuring Aryan Sigdel and Keki Adhikari in the lead role was released on February 10, 2012 in theaters across Nepal.
"I am sorry" is a love story of Gaurav (Aryan Sigdel) and Shruti ( Keki Adhikari). Shruti comes from a rich family and is responsible of her family business. Shruti found the pressure of her family business and high class society life overwhelming. So, she runs away to a new place to live a normal life. She meets Gaurav, an innocent taxi driver, who helped her to settle in the new place. Both fell for each other in a short time span. But, they hadn't talked about their feelings to each other. On a day they planned to meet and talk about it, Shruti's father arrives and takes her back. At the same time, a gang kidnaps Gaurav too. You might not want watch all the ups and downs of their love story in the theater.
Director Dinesh Raut's done a justice with his debut movie, "I am Sorry". He has presented the story in a good way although at times he has missed bringing out the best from the actors. The first half is interesting and smooth way on although some of the scenes seem unrealistic. For example, It is unrealistic to see the children of remote parts using English language with a taxi driver, in a show for orphanages showing love story drama.
Earlier, the writer of this movie Pradip Bhardwaj had said that this movie doesn't resemble any Bollywood or Korean movies. One can't deny that Bhardwaj has written a short and sweet love story.Purshottam Pradhan's camera work is also appreciable. He has been successful in capturing beautiful scenes of hilly areas of Nepal.
Music by Tara Prakash Limbu is another strength of the movie. Songs are melodious and wonderful and move along with the flow of the movie. Although songs won't let you feel bored, a commercial song (item song) would have been a nice addition. Such a song could have been a vehicle to attract more youths to the theater.
Aryan Sigdel, known as a lover boy of Nepali film industry, has an important role in the movie. But, Aryan's performance is not up to the expectation. It has been 3-4 years since he has been doing such lover boy characters and this one is no different. In the second half, all of Aryan's roles are very weak. Sometimes he seem to be reading the script in front of the camera. Aryan's performance can hence be considered one of the major weakness of the movie.
Keki Adhikari had justified the role of her character with a nice performance. She has done very well in different roles like a businessperson, a lover and an innocent girl. Shyam Aryal's short and sweet role is also appreciable. Keshav Bhattarai's role is also strong and he has done very good job, as usual.
In a whole, "I am sorry" can be considered a positive step in Nepali film industry. We have seen many love story movies fail in recent days due to lack of good contents. This movie might change it as it has got good story, nice way of story telling, good music, wonderful locations and beautiful sceneries. The first half of the movie is sure to win the heart of audiences. Although, this movie might not do as well as the recent blockbuster 'Loot', the movie is expected to do a good business.
This entry was posted in Movie Review and tagged Aryan Sigdel, Dinesh Raut, I am Sorry, Keki Adhikari, Pradip Bhardwaj. Bookmark the permalink.
i likd ua movie soo mch….
ua part here i likd da most ..


The Missouri House passed legislation Tuesday night to allow to allow concealed permit holders to carry guns on campus for self-defense.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) attacked Liberty University President Jerry Falwell Jr. using false information Tuesday.
Gov. Matt Bevin (R) made clear Friday he will sign legislation to eliminate Kentucky's concealed carry permit requirement.
The Kentucky House of Representatives passed legislation Friday to eliminate the state's requirement to obtain a permit in order to carry a concealed handgun for self-defense.
Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt (R) signed legislation Wednesday to abolish his state's concealed carry permit requirement.
The Kentucky Senate passed a bill late last week to eliminate the state's concealed carry permit requirement.
Police in Kingsport, Tennessee, say a man entered a dental office Wednesday morning to kill his wife and was shot multiple times by an armed patient.
Pop superstar Pink's husband, Carey Hart, is ripping critics who attacked him for letting their daughter shoot a rifle.
Rep. Richard Hudson (R-NC-8) told Breitbart News that people must reach out to their representatives and senators to secure passage of national reciprocity.


Can opposite personalities get along?
When you become friends with a person, a lot of the time you end up adopting a lot of the same quirks, but can the same be said when you start out as opposites? It can be a tricky situation to be in, especially if those differences are deeper than preferring strawberry ice cream to a scoop of chocolate.
Mary and Sienna discuss the sometimes awkward position people may find themselves in if they learn that their coworker or new friend believes in a set of completely different values. Even though someone doesn't share the same ideals as you does not always mean that they are a bad person and sometimes it might be a good way to start a dialogue together.
Sometimes there is a special harmony when two friends are complementary to each other, and a notable example would be if one friend is more introverted and the other is an extrovert. The pair can often work together to balance out the relationship because they each bring different things to the table. While the extroverted friend might help encourage the introverted friend to do new things, the introverted friend could help the extrovert learn how to enjoy time alone to relax. Opposites can be great because they can push each other out of their comfort zones, but they can also improve each other since they're able to recognize each others' weaknesses.
Opposites Do Not Attract: Social Status and Behavioral-Style Concordances and Discordances Among Children and the Peers Who Like or Dislike Them via the Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology.
When do opposites attract? Interpersonal complementarity versus similarity via the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
Why Your Best Friend Should Be Your Opposite via Elite Daily.
Tune in next week for Episode 19: Are You My BFF?
← Ep. 19. Are You My BFF?