Most of us can remember having a hangover and saying to ourselves that we will never drink alcohol again. Why do we? Why do we drink to begin with?
Alcohol is a poison. It kills nerve cells, and hence pain. It is a sugar hit which picks us up at the end of a hard day and leaves us feeling comfortably numb. It is a treat, a reward for a day's work. The prospect of enjoying a drink can get us through a day, a week, a life. It can be a substitute for intimacy, a companion, a best friend. No wonder we arc up at the prospect of losing it.
Alcohol also opens us up to energies which are not us. It can allow us to behave in ways we would never behave without it. It can lead us to do things which are dangerous, hurtful to ourselves and others and leave us feeling ashamed. We cannot bear to remember and feel this, and so we drink again.
Medical and scientific research, which has supported the drinking of alcohol in small amounts, is finally coming out and saying what common sense, and our bodies, have been telling us all along – that there is no safe level of alcohol. One hangover should be enough to tell us this, if we listened to the truth of our bodies. Why do we ever have more than one?
Why do we need to drink alcohol?
Why is our life not enough for us?
Why are we tired? Why are we angry? Why are we sad?
When we drink, it is easy to deny that we feel this way. We go to work, we live our day, and at the end of the day we have our reward. We bind ourselves together with it socially; we use it to sweeten our relationships; it comforts us when we are on our own. It is easier to believe that life is good with a drink in our hand.
If we think about taking the drink away, we start to feel differently. This is almost unbearable for many, and we look outside ourselves, blaming others or our lives, to give us an excuse to keep drinking.
Let's say, just for fun, that we have a glimmer of an understanding that we are drinking because we have to, not because we want to, and we would like to stop but don't know how. Let's say we have some health problems, or it is causing problems in our relationships, or we are just sick and tired of needing to drink.
Where do we start? How do we deal with the feelings that bubble to the surface? What helped me was to understand that I was drinking for a reason, and to take full responsibility for how I was feeling and for the choices I had made in my life. Blaming others for my problems is a very bad habit of mine, and this was a fact I had to face, before I could deal with anything else. I also had to look at the way I was living and make deep and lasting changes. This was incredibly difficult, and I fully understand why people choose to drink, even when they know it is hurting them. I was one of those people for a very long time.
We drink because we don't feel good about ourselves or our lives. If we did, why would we poison ourselves? These feelings can be very subtle and deep, and we may have created a great life to cover them up, but they are there, underneath.
So, how do we deal with them? It helps to be very loving and tender with ourselves as they start to surface. It also helps to get help. There is a saying "A problem cannot be solved from the level at which it was created", and this is very true of a drinking problem.
I found the work of Serge Benhayon and Universal Medicine more helpful than the many other things I had tried in the past. Serge helped me to feel that I was so much more than I had previously believed, that there was a greatness, a grandness of love in me that I had not connected to for a long time. By connecting to that love, that living stillness within me, I was able to make more self-loving choices.
I continued to drink after meeting Serge, and would sometimes come to sessions with a hangover, and sometimes drink after I had seen him. This was because I still could not bear to feel how I had lived, and the choices I had made, which were still living in my body. It was a very painful and difficult time, but I received only loving support from Serge. He never judged me, never told me what to do, only offered me love.
We drink because we think that our life is not enough, that we are not enough. But we are. Try life without alcohol. Get help if you need it. Feel and deal with what lies beneath your need to drink. Feel what is truly within you. Give yourself a chance to feel how great you truly are.
Indeed, why do we repeat a choice that we have already established is not supporting us? It is interesting how we get more attracted to less loving choices as if to test how much we can push and get away with it – till we get seriously burnt.
'Give yourself a chance to feel how great you truly are' and allow yourself to be, and those props we use like alcohol do not allow that, so experimenting with not having them gives us a space to understand more clearly who we are and where we are at … and that honesty allows us to live more truly ourselves.
It seems to me that from what I have read and understood that we are replacing alcohol with drugs. Is it possible that alcohol isn't enough anymore and in comparison to some drugs expensive? With states and countries legalizing a particular drug I feel we are making a bad situation with our health even worse. For some there seems to be a perverse wish to obliterate our current way of life by getting through it as best they can by numbing themselves to the horror of what we have all contributed to and now do not like.
Alcohol is the drink of choice of the spirit. It permits to keep trying what does not work once and again.
I last drank alcohol nearly 12 years ago. I absolutely love my life without it and do not miss it one bit. I have more energy, never have to worry about drinking and driving – but more so, I feel that it is a very self-loving thing to do – and as Anne suggests here, until we actually experience life without alcohol – or any such drug, we don't know how amazing we naturally feel. What if, our natural state is one of pure harmony and is absolutely delicious? It is for me.
'…until we actually experience life without alcohol – or any such drug, we don't know how amazing we naturally feel' Yes, that's it. Sometimes we don't take a step because we think we are not going to be able to do it or because we haven't experienced yet how it would feel later in our body. But why not having a try? There's no need of taking that first step with the choice of definitely let it go. Just have a try and honestly observe how the body feels… and having that new experience of ourselves, when ready, make a new self-loving choice.
There has been a major piece of worldwide research published today that concludes (and confirms) that no amount of alcohol is good for us. I wonder then if we should now review our 'recommended weekly allowances' because in my view, recommending an amount of something sounds like its a positive thing when we clearly now know that it isn't. Surely in the light of this research we should not be recommending alcohol at all.
It is crazy and yet makes sense, we drink to change the way we feel and yet the way we feel is a direct result of not living and feeling who we truly are.
I don't miss drinking at all now, and I am far more aware of what goes on around me, and it is interesting to see how that affects others around me who then tend to drink less or not at all, not because I say anything, it is as if they have given themselves permission to be themselves, and therefore they don't feel they have to join in with everyone else.
Anne thank you for your honest article, when I gave up drinking I realised how much of a habit it had become in order not to feel the hurt I felt inside, now I don't drink alcohol at all because I have dealt with the hurt that I felt, and am now making more loving choices that support me to be who I truly am.
Anne your absolute honesty is what made your blog so inspirational. Yes – Alcohol is a poison and your amazing blog could be the best medicine ever and should be read each time people choose to drink it.
Alcohol allows who chooses it to manage life by altering the body and playing with the physiology. It delivers a state of being to be with ourselves and in the world in a specific quality. It gives a sense of self-sufficiency because we can get there on our own. Yet, it opens up to be played by the unseen. The self-sufficiency is simply rubbish. We are not left alone.
When we feel we are not enough we look outside of ourselves to fill that void, that emptiness, and alcohol is one of those vices that is used, when we choose to become honest with what we are feeling and take responsibility for our choices, true change can come by lovingly caring for ourselves.
Very wise advice Anne with which I completely agree having had a very similar experience. Acknowledging that I was drinking because I believed I was not enough and then choosing to make loving choices for myself made all the difference. It is now 12 years since I have had a drink of alcohol and I feel marvellous for it.
When we allow ourselves to feel the grandness of our potential is definitely supports us to make more loving choices – great blog Anne.
I remember at one end of this debate wondering why on earth would I ever want to give up drinking alcohol – it was what I did at parties, everyone else did it and it was so normal. I have not had a drink for well over 10 years and I wonder why on earth anyone would want to drink? To dull the sparkle inside, to stop being myself, and to stop me feeling everything that I can feel inside. I feel naturally me, all the time.
I have recently read some guideline for heart failure prevention and it actually states that the incidence of heart disease in those who drink moderate amounts of alcohol is lower than in nondrinkers, and even though they may not encourage nondrinker to start drinking, they would not advise patients to give up alcohol unless they are obviously having a drinking problem – and they say so because there are some research published out there that support this. We don't need any research, especially a sponsored one, to tell us what is good/bad for our body, our own very first experience with alcohol can tell us loud and clear how this substance does not agree with our body – yet somehow we train our body and convince our mind to keep drinking. Incredible. Self-love is a very simple medicine that can begin to undo this choice.
Beautiful Anne! Such an honest offering of the reality of why we drink. We are all guilty of lacking appreciation for ourselves, and hence the need to be topped up with deceiving confirmation.
To have a hang over more than once, to over eat more than once and feel the bloating effects and to choose anxiousness more than once are all things that no one could honestly enjoy in their body. So why do we do it? What are we getting out of these choices, which totally disregard the body?
Why do we poison ourselves over and over again? This is a great question Anne. Alcohol gave me such a hard time I gave it up nearly 20 years ago. I would have the hangover from hell after 2 glasses of wine. It was so not worth drinking. As I recall I was in peri-menopause at the time and my body was demanding a stop. The thing is why did I wait for the body to scream at me when I knew from the first sip that alcohol was poison.
I agree with so much of what you say here Anne. i remember the first time I got drunk and how very sick I was afterwards. I could not go to work the day after. All my colleagues felt it was funny and treated me like I had somehow passed some initiation. I continued to drink for many years after that. When I decided to stop drinking, it took me a year before I finally had my last drink. My body was always telling me that alcohol was no good for me but I kept ignoring it.
We are not stupid – we are a highly intelligent race – so why are we drinking poison? The life style of drinking alcohol is a very thick and heavy consciousness that swallows people up into thinking they are having a great time, that they can be more themselves and connect to people more freely when intoxicated. Even the work 'intoxicated' really gives the severity of the substance away as TOXIC.
So true Ann what you've shared makes perfect sense… one hangover ought to be IT, and in fact for me it was, but that is most definitely not the norm. It begs the question what is really going on that we don't seemingly have a grasp of our good sense over and above the need to numb ourselves in this way.
Yes Anne, one hangover should be enough, why wait for the research when our bodies were telling us the truth all along, 'Medical and scientific research, which has supported the drinking of alcohol in small amounts, is finally coming out and saying what common sense, and our bodies, have been telling us all along – that there is no safe level of alcohol'.
"Give yourself a chance to feel how great you truly are." When we reconnect to the beauty of who we are this is not a feeling that we want to poison or escape from.
I laughed when I read the title of this blog, as the first answer I thought of to, 'why do we have more than one hangover' is that we must be stupid or gluttons for self-punishment. But we are intelligent, very intelligent. We have just forgotten (or I should say avoided connecting to) the fact that our intelligence comes from our body. So instead of being stupid, we could say we stubbornly avoid hearing what our body has to say and use all means of poisons, like alcohol to shut it up.
Great exposure Anne on when we have a need we can and do whatever we need to for that need to be achieved… that is why we drink again after a hangover or why we binge eat or stay on the computer for hours on end checking out. I can remember not liking the feeling of alcohol from one sip starting to run through my veins and body, I felt the imposition of it on the body instantly. Yet it gave me a way to be different with people and a so-called freedom in the bedroom. But I never felt like it was a great thing to do or championed having an amazing night out… because in truth I always knew it was hurting me.
Anne I agree it is crazy to experience more than one hangover, I suffered greatly from hangovers and then would get up and do it all over again, it was obvious the level of disconnection and misery I was choosing to live with allowed me to reach for a drink again. Letting go of alcohol was quite simple when I began to self care and listen to my body as the messages I was receiving I could no longer ignore. I now know there is no way I would ever say yes to alcohol again in my life and this is thanks to Serge Benhayon and Universal Medicine and the true love and deep wisdom these teachings bring us all.
When we begin to ask questions e.g.why we do things or why do we feel a certain way that we know is harming our body the self honesty opens doors to opportunities for a healing to occur. I recently have been pondering on why I get so tired after being in the company of others. It feels an old pattern where in the past I have blamed others for the tiredness but am beginning although reluctantly to see that it was My choice to self sabotage myself to be left feeling tired sometimes exhausted and it is also My choice to accept self love to get to the root of this behaviour and heal it.
Yes Anne, discussions about Alcohol can tend to dwell on declaring it 'good' or 'bad'. But the truth is Alcohol does work – in that it deliberately decommissions our feelings and inner senses. We can't say that it's not effective, but what is awesome to explore is why and how it is that we want to wipe out our senses this way. After all, it's not as though only a few people poison themselves – drinking is massively popular all over the world today. Could it be, as you steadily illustrate Anne, that it's all because we are infinitely more aware than we think, divinely dear, sensitive, grander and geared to know Love? What if, far from being Alchoholics Anonymous we are marvellous and multi-dimensional markers of God's light? That to me, would go some way to explain why we have such trouble accepting life today as it is, and sleeping at night.
Funnily enough I did only have one really bad hangover in my life… the very first time I drank. It was so bad I was in bed for 2 days, vomiting for 1 of those and vowed I would never do that to myself again. And I didn't. I recall my parents treating me quite normally afterwards with one of them casually saying to me… 'I hope you're going to put that down to experience!" I definitely did, never forgetting it, and never willing to suffer through it again. I would happily have never touched alcohol again, but found it hard to be the only one sober at any party or night out. Eventually this didn't matter to me either and for nearly 20 years I haven't had a drop, and haven't missed it even slightly. The way I feel without alcohol beats any short time high I could get.
This is a very loving approach to one of our biggest challenges in the world.
I found it easy to give up alcohol. What I found difficult was giving up the emotion of sadness that I had been masking for much of my life. I found that the sadness was how I defined and saw myself and couldn't imagine myself as not being this way. The truth is though as shared by Anne in this blog, that we are all much grander than the emotions we feel. It is by far the greatest gift to allow for the possibility that what is shared here is true, as we may feel emotions, like sadness or anger, but we are not that. We are the grace that lies below the emotions.
With any harmful habits that I might have, I do find it very helpful to stop and ask myself how I am feeling in that moment and what am I trying to bury or not feel? Opening up this honest conversation with myself and re-connecting with myself usually puts a stop to any desire to bury my feelings and therefore any cravings for things that will do that job.
One of the unusual and successful characteristics and teachings of Serge Benhayon and the work he does is to not trying to solve a problem or change a behaviour without first connecting to the healthy and untouched part within, dip into the essence that has got lost and is missed by us more than anything else. It is the separation from that essence that produces the destructive and loveless behaviours and emotions we then suffer from on top of the original pain. It all comes down to returning to our essence to truly solve or undo the issues we won´t even have otherwise.
Alcohol was for me a necessity but with a history of alcoholism in my family I was always aware of how unhealthy my relationship with it was. I stopped after a few years of wanting to. Then one day I decided I was not going to travel any further down the road of alcohol dependancy and I stopped. This was my first truly self-loving choice. A few years later I met Serge Benhayon and began to understand and become understanding of why anyone chooses to drink alcohol and this is when the healing began.
I have heard alcohol referred to as truth serum because people would drop their inhibitions and blurt out their pent up emotions. Why would we need something so poisonous to our bodies for us to open up to each other? When we abuse ourselves with alcohol we are being dishonest with our own body. There is no honesty or true connection in 'pub talk' we just look for people who will enjoin our self abuse.
We drink to take the edge off life, when reality is too severe, and we don't want to feel it clearly, we would rather muddy the waters, we would rather justify our behavior than take responsibility for it. Basically we use alcohol to numb our hurt and angst and to help us be dishonest. It is the numbing we are addicted to and not the alcohol. Think about it, we must have deep hurts we don't want to feel if we repeatedly medicate ourselves to the extent that a hangover is less painful than feeling our hurts.
What helped me stop alcohol for good was knowing I was opening up myself to more issues than I already had going on. I was doing it because so many others were. You only have to acknowledge the truth by being honest why you drink, instead of creating further issues that complex otherwise a simple truth.
Drinking for me was symptom, I was unhappy within myself and it provided the perfect distraction, the hangover would occupy me for days, the physical pain stopped me from noticing how depressed I was. It was the best thing I had on hand to escape all the pain I was in. The thing is that when I stopped drinking, I didn't address the energy and so it was replaced with other things that are equally enabling me escape from feeling, might look better but is it?
This is a great blog Anne, and I know many people who have exacerbated misery and mental health issues with alcohol but it is rarely discussed in a manner that gets to the root of the issue. Why do we drink alcohol knowing it is harmful? For myself in my twenties & thirties I was living a lie. I was living what I thought society was telling me about being a man was all about. I knew it was a lie and not my true nature but everybody else was living their own lies as well and they approved of me living my lie. Whenever I had moments of clarity where I could see my life clearly it put me in conflict with the life I was living, something had to give. I did not feel like I had the courage to change so I turned to alcohol because it was acceptable and it helped me live a lie, when reality was making things too clear for me alcohol would help me blur the lines and I could convince myself it was ok, I could justify anything which I could not sober. I have been clean now for 9 years and in that time I have been more honest and responsible in clearing the lies from my life. In my experience when you go for alcohol you turn away from honesty, and it makes everything worse.
'Why are we tired? Why are we angry? Why are we sad?'. Such simple questions, but boy will they help get to what's really going on for why we reach for the tipple to take the edge off.
There is so much support out there, support I have reached out for and received and it's changed my life. I never had a so called 'problem' with alcohol and compared to many drank very little, and never drank when I was down, but the reason I drank alone was above all else to have more confidence. I felt like it gave me a little boost, like it brought out the bigger me. So not true, it was a very false sense of security and working on being more of me has far outweighed the temporary feeling of being invincible with a drink.
What Anne has shared here about the reasons we drink alcohol feels so true, and I can relate to them very much. What I have also noticed, after letting go of alcohol since I found Universal Medicine, is that at first, I replaced alcohol with other drinks like coffee or green tea, which I used to over-stimulate me to not feel those same feelings of not being 'enough' and not feeling the Truth of who I am inside. So it's helpful to have an awareness as to when and what we are using to not feel what is going on for us so we can heal those issues that keep us from knowing who we truly are.
I agree Anne that when I used to drink alcohol and I would wake up the next day I would feel a deep sense of regret at the harm I had caused. I did not have words or full awareness of it at the time but my feeling now looking back is that I was sensing the harm not just to my body physically, but the energetic harm I was doing to myself and others by inviting an energy into my body/being through drinking.
I have come to realise that blaming others is no other than an avoidance of responsibility in that I am a part of what is going on around me. For so long I have avoided my part in creation under the false illusion that I had come from another planet to save the world!
It kind of begs the same question for why we repeat any of the things that do not serve us.. that make us feel ill, or tired, that creates reactions, feelings of emptiness. In truth its not that hard to feel the simplicity of everything that we are offered in this life – just ask a child. Yet we have distanced ourselves from this simplicity, built a wall around it to protect us and it is that distance that then allows this behaviour to repeat again and again.
Can I be so blunt as to say if all the true research breaks things like alcohol down and confirms what is already pretty obvious, it's a poison then there is no real argument. You choose to drink it or you choose to debate it and you have already made a choice well before the words are out of your mouth. We may think this is also something but the truth is that there is more to us than meets the eye. There is the fact of energy, the whole world is energy and so the weight given to any decision should come back to energy well before any discussion is gone into. What energy would give you anything other then the truth of alcohol? An energy that doesn't care at all for you but is just looking to have you not be truly you. If we hold that we are love, truly love then anything that is within you saying it's ok to do something or drink something like this is already simply not you. It's great to get to know and trust yourself by feelings and bring everything back to this. Walk away and you can do anything but at some point that anything needs to be balanced. I would rather walk clear in the present rather then be in the future trying to make up for the past.
Why we choose to drink alcohol has many reasons, my personal one was to fit in with friends and family. Alcohol itself never had a hold on me, it was easy to give up, what was difficult is how by choosing to do this it has ment a massive shift in how I feel about myself. It has revealed how little I thought of myself, hence the choice to drink to fit in. This is what hurt and there are still remnants of it today that I am steadily clearing from my life. To me it is absolutely insidious how drinking contributed to how I felt about myself. There is such an un explored aspect to alcohol and the connection to how it keeps one totally oblivious to the fact of the beauty and grace that resides within. This part of our selves, the whole world deserves to see and feel.
"Give yourself a chance to feel how great you truly are." This is an invitation to address our problems/vices in a different way. Instead of standing stuck and dead-ended in front of our behaviours, knowing they are not doing us any good it allows us to walk along the road, it allows us to walk with us and to ponder of what is all there to appreciate about ourselves, it allows us to come from the fullness of ourselves which we then can work on to strengthen, to expand. And the more we do that the less we give room for the 'checking out' the 'not wanting to see' ourselves.
It seems that in life we are innately full of a natural ability to sense what we are feeling and acknowledge the truth, and when we are young we live very close to this but learn to develop ourselves out of this to comply.
It's astonishing how we can have a bad hangover and then continue to drink – with such a clear message. It makes it obvious that we are more than human and there is a part of us that seeks a constant form of recognition with something – even though that could be harming our body.
'Alcohol is a poison. It kills nerve cells, and hence pain.' This fact alone should be enough to change the way we look at alcohol and the seeming 'pleasures' it gives at the time of drinking. Imagine if alcohol didn't actually have sugar in it! I bet we wouldn't drink it then, no matter how satisfying the escape from reality was.
Great point Rachael. I remember when tasting alcohol for the first time it literally tasted like poison.. now how is that something we can like and say we enjoy… ?
I agree Anne, one hangover should be enough for us to learn and accept that alcohol is not a healthy option for our body but unfortunately it rarely is and certainly wasn't in my experience. I cannot begin to count how many hangovers I have had in the past, and although the morning after many a time I said 'I am never drinking again' I always did…until one day I felt so rotten with the ramifications of the after effects I didn't. Today I can honestly say today I feel so much better by getting off the merry go round that alcohol brings to our daily life.
We need a feeling of our greatness within our bodies as without that we are lost and will always look outside to find that greatness or fill the gap. Universal Medicine provides us with this marker of how amazing we are by just being us, that is why so many people are successful in making new choices. It is much easier to make self-loving choices when you feel full inside and know what you are cherishing, then when you cannot feel this, as there is nothing worth doing it for.
Indeed, Anne – why more than one hangover? Why more than one bloated stomach? Why more than one argument? Why more than one war? The more it happens, the more 'normal' it becomes in our life.
What an offer…give yourself a chance to feel how great you really are! Something that struck me as I read your blog was how in movies and on TV we observe people drinking as their form of medicine for things that happen to them, we watch it be their medication, their distraction and yet we rarely apply the same level of observation to our own life till something happens to make us sit up and reassess.
Yes Ester even our hero's in the movies turn to alcohol when times get tough. Having a binge for a while is considered ok for our movies, ok for their private lives, and ok for us as well. You never learn from life's lessons by numbing yourself, it is better to humbly feel the consequences of your choices and be loving to yourself.
Once we start connecting to the light within, alcohol simply doesn't make sense, and yet it is still tempting sometimes to seek a form of numbness when met with the immense cruelty and devious games and assault that the world indulges in – so learning to observe and truly understand how and why the world acts in such ways helps allow true compassion, and so instead of judgement and reaction (and seeking numbness and oblivion) it is possible hold steady and stay true, connected to that inner light we all hold within.
It is very exposing of where we are as a society when those who speak up about the harmful effects of alcohol get pilloried by their peers, professionals, even doctors yet each day we somehow manage to ignore the levels of liver and kidney disease, diabetes, not to mention the alcohol-fuelled domestic violence epidemic. What is going on within us that we turn a blind eye to such a massive crisis.
Will power is not enough to stop any form of habit that is medication based…. And connecting to the loving beings we are is also not enough if we have not addressed the emptiness or hurt that lay as the root cause of our behaviours. Once addresses however, the need for medication in any form just falls away, amazingly so.
Why do we poison ourselves day in and day out? Be that alcohol, sugar, caffeine etc the fact that they are legal and legitmised does not take away from how we feel after their consumption. A brief high to alleviate the discomfort we may feel, followed by the repercussions only to turn the wheel once again. Seen clearly it seems insane, yet it is how we all live day to day.
Why do we ever have more than one hangover? Because we are masters at overriding our innate wisdom, just as we so too can be masters of listening to it should we make the choice to remember how divine we truly are. This is a great presentation of the truth behind why we do what we do, thankyou Anne.
"Alcohol can be a substitute for intimacy, a companion, a best friend. No wonder we arc up at the prospect of losing it." The relationship I chose to have with alcohol was the best way to avoid a loving relationship with myself and look at the things I knew I was responsible for and with alcohol you keep everyone at a safe distance. Living without alcohol is freeing oneself from a dependency on something we all know we should not put in our body and it makes my life truly loving and joyful.
This formula for becoming more aware of how GRAND we really are, goes with any choice we make that moves against our divine and naturally loving ways. Why are we still eating foods that make us sick? Why are we choosing to indulge in emotions?
"What helped me was to understand that I was drinking for a reason, and to take full responsibility for how I was feeling and for the choices I had made in my life." Oh yes very true, all our unloving behaviours have originated from the feeling of not being content with ourself in life and that it is our responsibility that we feel this way. I found and at times find it very uncomfortable to feel how everything that I feel and do not like (or like) is indeed because of, yes, my own choices and not because of anyone else. The oldest hurt is probably that we choose to please others over feeling the greatness and amazingness in ourselves. Knowing this there is also a way forward with taking this responsibility. Thank you for sharing Anne very inspiring.
Awesome and thank you Anne – a 101 sort of guidance if you feel like drinking is no longer your way.
"Alcohol can be a substitute for intimacy, a companion, a best friend. No wonder we arc up at the prospect of losing it." – And so I understand why I was not just able, but happy to quit alcohol out of my life: I did start to go for intimacy in my relationships, I did open up to people, become more committed and embedded myself into a community and with that – into humanity. I feel connected to me and all. I work on it when I lose it. I can count on me, I will come back to connection when I find myself out of it. I take responsibility about my longing for deep connections. And so – Alcohol is not needed any more to numb my lack of intimacy or lack of taking responsibility. Because I go for it instead of numbing my giving-up.
Anne, what a great sign-off 'Give yourself a chance to feel how great you truly are', and that is what many of us avoid, and we can use alcohol and other substances to temper life and our reactions to it, but it really doesn't work and we know it, but it's only when we get the support and are willing to understand how we truly feel that we can learn to drop those props we have, and come back to feeling how great we can be.
Anne you wrote: "A problem cannot be solved from the level at which it was created" that is really true and therefore most of us need someone who gave us a true feedback and it is on us if we listen or choose to not listen – everything is always a choice.
"What helped me was to understand that I was drinking for a reason, and to take full responsibility for how I was feeling and for the choices I had made in my life." That is really a profound realization Anne – this one can really change a whole life as you so wonderfully demonstrated and shared.
"Give yourself a chance to feel how great you truly are." So very honouring of who we are.
" – that there is no safe level of alcohol." Thank you for stating this so clearly Anne Malatt. We need to hear this. We need to hear truth, so that we can start to stop fooling ourselves.


A coding competition with a $5000 grand prize. Sponsored by FreshBooks.
Push is a Toronto coding competition sponsored by FreshBooks.
FreshBooks is a cloud accounting software built for self-employed professionals and their teams. We're proudly based in Toronto. Learn more about FreshBooks.
© 2018 FreshBooks. All Rights Reserved.


text:
Q: Can I have multiple .finally() as well as multiple .catch() in Promise.all()?

var p1 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {

        resolve('p1');
    });

    var p2 = new Promise((resolve, reject) => {
        resolve('p2');
    });
    Promise.all([
        p1.finally(() => { console.log("p1 completed"); }),
        p2.finally(() => { console.log("p2 completed"); }),
    ]).then(values => {
        console.log(values[0]);
        console.log(values[1]);
    }).finally(() => {
        console.log("all() completed");

I think I've only seen examples on the web with a single .finally() at the end
[1]: https://i.stack.imgur.com/HeQV8.png

A: You may chain as many .finally() calls as you like onto any promise.
(Promise.all() returns a new promise, so this rule applies here as well.)
Run this, and you should see all 3 comments log.

Promise.resolve().
  finally(() => console.log('Finally #1')).
  finally(() => console.log('Finally #2')).
  finally(() => console.log('Finally #3'))

A: Sure, finally is a chainable promise method just like catch (with the only difference that its callback does not take a parameter). You can use it as many times as you want, on any promise.
Promise.all([
    p1.finally(() => { console.log("p1 completed"); }),
    p2.finally(() => { console.log("p2 completed"); }),
]).finally(() => {
    console.log("all() completed");
})

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Abstrat: presentation of PhD student's work who are going to attend to NetSys 2019, the International Conference on Networked Systems to be held in Munich, Germany, from March 18th up to 21st, 2019.
Bio: Daniel holds a master degree in applied computing in the area of software engineering from the Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC Brazil). Currently, is a employee of COPELABS, the research unit of the Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologias, working as junior researcher in Lisbon-PT. Daniel is also a student of the New Media and Pervasive System (NEMPS 2017/2018) doctoral program of the Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades de Tecnologias. Used to be a university professor (between 2004 and 2017) in the subjects of database, information systems and software engineering in universities in the city of Joinville-Brazil. Also worked in the software industry (between 2002 and 2017), developing ERP systems and working on all stages of software development, from research and planning to delivery and maintenance.
Bio:Liliana I. Carvalho (female, M.Sc.), is a junior researcher at COPELABS (Cognitive and People-centric Computing), University Lusófona, and a PhD student at the New Media and Pervasive Systems (NEMPS) PhD programme, working on pervasive sensing aspects in the context of social interaction and social well-being. Her current research interests concern human behavior inference via mobile sensing platforms.
Bio:Godwin Anuork Asaamoning is a junior researcher at SITI, COPELABS. He holds a Bachelor of Education degree in Information Technology from University of Education Winneba, Ghana, and a Master of Science degree in Information Technology from the Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology (KNUST), also in Ghana. Currently, he is a PhD student in the New Media and Pervasive Systems Programme at Universidade Lusófona de Humanidades e Tecnologia in Portugal. His Thesis title; "Wireless Networking for Autonomous Mobile Smart Cameras".


One of the rooms at the top of my sister Laura's "TO ORGAINZE" list was her master closet. It was stuffed, and overflow items were haning in other closets.
The first thing we did was to measure the shelves and buy large clear bins, for their out-of-season clothing. We placed her summer footware on the bottom, covered them with plastic, and then layered all the summer clothing that could be folded. As we went along, she tossed or donated everything that didn't fit well or look great on her. Now, only a few long formal dresses are hanging in the guest room closet; everything else fit into the bins!
Then, we hung a shoe bag on the right side, with all her cold-weather shoes, and put her boots on the floor. Just to the left of the shoes, we hung the jewelry organizer.
We lined up the clothes by category and then by color within those categories, with long dresses at the far end of the closet. I recommend using the same kind of hangers throughout—it gives a more peaceful feeling.
We did the same thing for her husband's side of the closet, then organized her make-up in the top drawer. In 4 hours, she had an organized closet!
Because many of you are swapping out your summer clothes for your winter ones, here are our best practices for storing out-of-season clothing. The last one may surprise you!
Please let me know if this was helpful for you!
Store clothes in the main part of the home; avoid storing clothing in attics and basements. Clean garments before storing.
Hang clothing on good quality hangers, not thin wire ones.
Never store clothes in plastic dry cleaner bags; the chemicals in the plastic will damage garments. Use fabric garment bags.
Don't hang knits or beaded garments that will stretch out. Store them in acid-free cardboard boxes or sturdy plastic bins. Lay sweaters flat or use acid-free tissue between folds to avoid creases.
Don't use mothballs; the smell is almost impossible to remove and the chemicals are harmful to skin and eyes. Use bags of cedar and herbs. Don't put cedar blocks directly on clothes (the oil might stain fabric); instead wrap them in acid-free tissue.
Store pricey cashmere in the freezer. Put the item in a zip-top plastic bag with some cotton batting to absorb moisture. The cold will kill insects and keep fabric fresh.
you're READY to bring your soul purpose to the forefront of your life NOW!
Then, you'll want to join me in attending Your Fierce Feminine Life, a 5 week tele seminar taught by ALisa Starkweather.
Alisa is a leader with 28 years of experience empowering women worldwide. She is a long-term visionary with a unique ability to show women how to pull aside the veil to their own inner potential and highest purpose and bring that forth in the world, and she is a woman that I trust as a solid guide.
Until now, you had to invest a year, several thousands dollars AND travel to New England to work with her IF you could get into one of her sold out trainings (which, last month, I was lucky enough to do!).
This entry was posted in De-Cluttering and Organizing, Uncategorized by Melody LeBaron. Bookmark the permalink.


text:
A Human Element: A Paranormal Suspense Novel (The Element Trilogy Book 1)
by Donna Galanti Donna Galanti
AMAZON TOP 20 BESTSELLER IN PARANORMAL SUSPENSE. AMAZON TOP 40 BEST SELLER IN SCIENCE FICTION.
Evil comes in many forms...
One by one, Laura Armstrong's friends and adoptive family members are being murdered, and despite her unique healing powers, she can do nothing to stop it. The savage killer haunts her dreams, tormenting her with the promise that she is next.
Determined to find the killer, she follows her visions to the site of a crashed meteorite in her hometown. There, she meets Ben Fieldstone, who seeks answers about this parents' death the night the meteorite struck. In a race to stop a madman, they unravel a frightening secret that binds them together.
But the killer's desire to destroy Laura face-to-face leads to a showdown that puts Laura and Ben's emotional relationship and Laura's pure spirit to the test. With the killer closing in, Laura discovers her destiny is linked to his, and she has two choices--redeem him or kill him.
PRAISE FOR THE AUTHOR
"Unrelenting, devious but full of heart. Highly recommended."--Jonathan Maberry, New York Times bestselling author of Code Zero
"Be afraid. Be very afraid. And be utterly absorbed by this riveting debut. A thriller star is born."--M.J. Rose, International bestselling author of The Collector of Dying Breaths
"Tugs on our heartstrings and plucks the gut-strings of horror. A true storyteller, highly reminiscent of Dean Koontz." --Dakota Banks, Award-winning author of the Mortal Path series
"Chilling suspense. A dark and haunting novel. Enjoy the ride."--Kindle Book Review
"A fast-paced paranormal suspense thriller that will keep you engrossed as you turn the pages. This suspenseful tale will stay with you long after you have read the last word."--Jersey Girl Book Reviews
"A suspenseful ride through life and love...and death." -Janice Gable Bashman, Author of Predator
"Such a beautiful, yet haunting debut novel." --Michael McCarty, Author of Lost Girl of the Lake
"A thriller with a huge, aching heart. Galanti's rich and provocative thriller asks big questions. With her blending of romance, the coming of age quest, and the supernatural, she is a writer to watch, who will surely expand the diameters of the thriller genre." --Catherine Stine, Author of Fireseed One
1st Place Winner: Best Paranormal Romantic Suspense Series 2014 Paranormal Romance Guild Reviewer's Choice Awards
Wild Trail Press

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Complementarity of Spin?
Thread starter Faradave
Faradave
I'm a layman who has reviewed some popular literature on QM. Apologies in advance for my naivety.
I'm of the impression that the quantum spin (±½) of an electron can be determined as it travels through a Stern-Gerlach apparatus (SGA) for the single direction in which the SGA is aligned (say, along the X-axis). Spin along other axes is a superposition of those states, with amplitudes corresponding to the angle departing from X. Spin is also said to be complementary. Spin measurement along different axes is mutually exclusive. For example, "A particle cannot have definite values for both X and Z at the same time." [ref]
It seems possible, at least in theory, to obtain values for both X and Z spin at the same time by the following method. Please let me know where it goes wrong.
1). Two electrons are prepared in an entangled, total-spin-zero state (each has spin opposite the other).
2). Two SGAs are oriented perpendicularly, one X-axis aligned and the other Z-axis aligned.
3). Each entangled electron is sent simultaneously through one of the perpendicular SGAs.
4). Spin X is determined for one electron while spin Z is determined for the other, at the same time.
5). Each electron had spin opposite the other, so spin X and spin Z of both electrons were simultaneously determined.
You are opening up an interesting track here... This is more or less exactly the same reasoning as in the original EPR-setup. Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen then used it to argue that QM had to be incomplete because it seemed possible to simultaneously measure definite values of two non-commuting observables (which should not be possible according to QM as you point out).
Your setup is also very close to the original setup proposed by J.S. Bell when deriving his inequalities. Thanks to Bell and later experiments confirming the strangness of entanglement, we now know what is wrong in the argument.
You (and EPR!) assume that the measurement of one particle does not change the state of the other particle. This does seem very reasonably indeed, but is not true for entangled particles! This is precisely the strange "spooky action at a distance"-behavior of entanglement that is clearly proven in the many experimental verifications of Bells theorem.
I admit that I was rooting for EPR in the chapters leading up to Bell's theorem (which I am now reviewing again.) Initially, I was curious whether spin complementarity was truly a property of the particle or simply a limitation of the measuring device (SGA). But as the given quote, "A particle cannot have definite values for both X and Z [spin] at the same time." [ref] indicates, QM insists that complementarity is a property of the particle.
Direct simultaneous measurements of a single particle may indeed be impossible. However, two particles sharing a single quantum state would seem to offer the opportunity to examine that state in different (even complementary) ways at once.
P.S. "Similar Threads" (below) lead me to virtually the identical question [here] (unanswered since 2006!)
Bill_K
Insights Author
Your reasoning founders on the use of the word "simultaneous".
4a) Suppose spin X is determined for particle A first. This determines the spin X for particle B. Then spin Z for particle B is measured. Particle A is not influenced by this. The two particles wind up with independent values.
4b) Suppose spin Z is determined for particle B first. This determines the spin Z for particle A. Then spin X for particle A is measured. Particle B is not influenced by this. The two particles wind up with independent values.
Same results, you can't tell 4a from 4b. And either way, you have independent values, no entanglement, no contradiction.
Bill_K said:
Your reasoning founders on the use of the word "simultaneous". ...spin X is determined for particle A first...Then spin Z for particle B is measured.
Are you saying that complementarity prohibits "simultaneous" measurement of two different (though entangled) particles?
I didn't propose measuring one electron spin first, then the other. They are to each proceed through a separate Stern-Gerlach apparatus for simultaneous X-spin and Z-spin assessments.
Is that not even theoretically possible? What mechanism prevents it?
No, I am saying that you are confusing yourself by imagining measurements at two different locations to be precisely simultaneous. The term has no operational meaning. The slightest departure from simultaneity in either direction, even one attosecond, spoils the paradox.
...simultaneous. The term has no operational meaning.
Then we might as well drop the term "simultaneous" from our language. But I said, "theoretically possible", not operationally possible.
Special Relativity makes clear that for any pair of events deemed simultaneous in one inertial reference frame, there are an infinite number of other frames in which they are not simultaneous. Conversely, if we find that two spin measurements are not quite simultaneous in our reference frame, we can be assured that there always exist inertial frames in which they are. Simultaneity is guaranteed, both theoretically and operationally, in this sense.
No, special relativity guarantees lack of simultaneity. Any argument that depends on the attainment of precise simultaneity fails, because the events are nonsimultaneous in all other rest frames.
However I assume we are talking about Schrodinger quantum mechanics, which is nonrelativistic. If you perform the stated measurements on particles A and B, and find that particle A has a definite value of Z spin, while particle B has a definite value of X spin, how can you claim that a basic principle has been violated?
Answer: you would have to show that the measurements took place at precisely the same time. PRECISELY the same time. There is no way to do this. Measurement of a time interval can only be done to some finite precision, and regardless of whether it is an attosecond or a millionth of an attosecond (whatever that is called!) it cannot be zero. And if it is not zero, quantum mechanics is saved!
Thanks Bill, but I don't think QM has much to fear from me!
...Schrodinger quantum mechanics, which is nonrelativistic. ...measurements... at precisely the same time. There is no way to do this.
I would suggest that for any two separate events in space-time (not having an event horizon between them), there exists a set of locations having equal intervals from both events. Observers occupying these will interpret the two events as simultaneous. However, I concede that QM is often claimed to be non-relativistic. (Notwithstanding that the Dirac equation improved upon Schrodinger's by applying relativistic considerations to the electron.)
It seems inconsistent to, on the one hand deny simultaneity (of measurements) and on the other hand, require it. What is entanglement if not particles sharing a state simultaneously?
Entanglement is still fairly mysterious. Perhaps it was not the best initial approach to the complementarity of quantum spin (a.k.a. intrinsic spin). Switching to a single particle would avoid the relativity of simultaneity, for now. My question might be restated this way (pertaining to an electron):
Quantum spin is not "classical" spin. The same spin magnitude is always observed on every axis measured. If no device can measure quantum spin on more than a single axis at a time, how can a claim that full quantum spin occurs on every observable axis at once, be refuted?
DrChinese
Faradave said:
You can perform this experiment, and simultaneity is irrelevant to the results. You now know Alice's X and Bob's Z. Cool.
Now the $64,000 question is whether you also know Alice's Z and Bob's X. The answer to that question is NO. And it would need to be YES for your idea to be useful. Learning Alice's X resets her Y and Z to indeterminate values. So you have accomplished nothing. It is simply a philosophical exercise to assert you know both Alice's X and Z components when no experiment can confirm that. (And further that experiments will show the Z to match the "expected" value only randomly.)
Thank you, DrChinese. This, believe it or not, is what I was struggling to say. The result is the same regardless of the time sequence.
So, also just elaborating on DrChinese's answer above, the argument in the original post goes wrong at:
This is not true, as DrChinese says. But I think the confusion here is about the non-local aspects of entanglement. In the original EPR paper they argued (just as you do!) that since a measurement at Alice's place could not possibly affect what they called "the physical reality" at Bob's place, Alice's X-measurement should also let us know Bob's X. But it is exactly this assumption - that a Alice measurement does not affect outcomes at Bill's - that leads to the various Bells inequalities. And they are clearly violated by QM predictions and in real experiments. So the (strange!) conclusion is that we can't assume that, and hence Alice's X-measurement does not determine Bob's X.
What is entanglement if not particles sharing a state simultaneously?
Entanglement is difficult to grasp. It is not really two particles "sharing a state", but rather a two-particle system that can only be viewed as one single QM system. In the case of two spin-half particles, we have to view them as one single 4-state system. (Which actually has one more degree of freedom than two separate 2-state systems!) And all predictions about measurements on the two individual particles and their correlations are independent of the order or simultaneousness in which measurements are done.
If no device can measure quantum spin on more than a single axis at a time, how can a claim that full quantum spin occurs on every observable axis at once, be refuted?
You have to be carefull with the word "occurs" here. If there is no way to measure it, how could you conclude that "it" occurs? I would say that it is the very statement that there is no conceivable measurement device that could (even in principle) measure more then one spin component at a time that is the reason for refuting the idea of simultaneous spin components of a single particle.
Dali said:
Yes, this part is hard. Made extra hard because we don't at all understand the process by which the 2 individual particles emerge from a 2 particle system. When and how do the 2 individual particles appear? There is no single answer that is really completely satisfying.
Your words were good, thought I might put a different way to help the OP follow the line of reasoning provided. Sometimes a reader picks up something said one way, while another picks up on a different analogy.
DrChinese said:
You can perform this experiment [simultaneous measurement of entangled X- and Z-spin.] You now know Alice's X and Bob's Z.
Thanks for the clarification.
[Do] you also know Alice's Z and Bob's X? …NO."
It seems the very essence of entanglement, that learning Alice's Z instantly gives us Bob's entangled Z. (If not, what is it that we are claiming is entangled in a "total-spin-zero" state?) Conversely, learning Bob's X instantly gives us Alice's entangled X. And you have graciously conceded the simultaneity of these! With all due respect (having read several of your other, quite helpful posts), all caps doesn't make "NO" correct.
Learning Alice's X resets her Y and Z to indeterminate values.
Now that's "irrelevant". In the moment before resetting*, we knew both X and Z, for Alice and Bob, at once.
*Do we actually believe "resetting" is a real physical process (as opposed to a model)?
…no experiment can confirm that…<->… you know both Alice's X and Z components [at once].
Exactly! It seems that the Principle of Complementarity boils down to denial of falsifiablity. That's a serious shortcoming for any model.
QM asserts that "A particle cannot have definite values for both X and Z at the same time."[ref]. The Principle of Complementarity conveniently prevents us from disproving this.
Under the same guise, it may be irrefutably claimed that quantum spin occurs in all observable directions at once. No matter which direction is measured, full spin is found.
Entanglement is difficult to grasp.
Thanks for your trouble Dali. That's why, in post #10 and the end of #16, I'm focusing instead on a single particle. After I reread Bell's inequality about six more times, I'm sure I'll have something to say about it in a separate thread. As you have guessed, despite overwhelming verification of Bell, I'm still rooting for EPR! And yet I'm not denying QM, I just feel it's still growing.
If there is no way to measure it [simultaneous spin in all observable directions], how could you conclude that "it" occurs?
The evidence is as I say in post #16, "No matter which direction is measured, full spin is found." It has already been established that quantum spin is not "classical" spin, so we should expect something to be different.
Ah, sorry, you are making basic mistake after basic mistake. You should follow the entire line of reasoning before making statements like the above.
QM does not assert something which is not falsifiable here, you are. QM states that you cannot predict both Alice's X and Z components simultaneously. Therefore, QM does not assert they are both simultaneously real. It is the realist (that would be you) who asserts this, and then points out that QM does not support it - which is somewhat humorous you must admit. It is you who is asserting something which cannot be demonstrated, that you DO know both Alice's X and Z. And yet, a subsequent experiment will show one of those to be the same and the other to only randomly correlate. Not really the same thing now, is it?
At any rate, the concept that you know Alice's X and Z was precisely the ingredient which makes Bell's Theorem. Extending your idea that you know X and Z, you get to the idea that Y exists too. Which ultimately leads to the Bell contradiction. So the point is, your starting position is that of EPR (where there was a disagreement about the simultaneity issue, as Bill_K referenced earlier). But we now know EPR is demonstrably incorrect.
A little late for you to be rooting for EPR! They didn't have the benefit, as you do, of knowing about Bell. Rosen (the R in EPR) lived long enough to learn of Bell, so his position naturally changed. Sadly, E and P did not.
Dr C said:
…you are making basic mistake after basic mistake.
That's what beginners do! I find it preferable to not beginning.
A little late for you to be rooting for EPR!...<-> we now know EPR is demonstrably incorrect.
By "rooting for EPR", I mean that at my early stage of learning, and presuming Bell (thus, Bohr) to be correct, I adopt the EPR position as strongly as I can, in order to force the most out of Bell's argument. Clearly, I'm not there yet.
That said, I would point out, "[Bell's] inequality is experimentally testable, and there have been numerous relevant experiments,… They have all shown agreement with quantum mechanics rather than the principle of local realism. However, the issue is not finally settled, for each of these experimental tests has left open at least one loophole by which it is possible to question the validity of the results."[ref]
DrC said:
QM states that you cannot predict both Alice's X and Z components simultaneously. Therefore, QM does not assert they are both simultaneously real.
I hope you'll try to understand why a beginner might feel that QM implies simultaneous spin about all observable axes.
I found, "One consequence of the generalized uncertainty principle is that the spin projection operators (which measure the spin along a given direction like x, y, or z), cannot be measured simultaneously. Physically, this means that it is ill defined what axis a particle is spinning about. A measurement of the z-component of spin destroys any information about the x and y components that might previously have been obtained."[ref]
It speaks of an "ill defined" axis which seems akin to the ill-defined position of an electron occupying an orbital. We're taught to consider the electron as spread out over the probability cloud, effectively occupying a set of locations simultaneously.
Further, it speaks of "spin components" about other axes. Though they "cannot be measured simultaneously", multiple components are clearly implied to exist (about every observable axis).
I also found, "…Schrödinger equation, angular momentum is quantized… so that total spin angular momentum [is] √(3/2)ħ. However, … when the electron is observed along one axis, such as the Z-axis, is quantized in terms of a magnetic quantum number, which can be viewed as a quantization of a vector component of this total angular momentum, which can have only the values of ±½ħ."[ref]
The spin½ we refer to is treated as "a component" of some larger "total angular momentum". I'm given the impression of a more classical total spin about some axis which distributes over all observable axes. Is that so unreasonable?
QM states that you cannot predict both Alice's X and Z components simultaneously.
What I found was, "the spin projection operators (which measure the spin along a given direction like x, y, or z), cannot be measured simultaneously" [ref]
Not really the same thing now, is it?
QM does not assert something which is not falsifiable here, you are.
When I suggest the Principle of Complementarity seems to deny falsifiability, that applies equally to models where spin occurs about all observable axes or where spin occurs about any one measured axis. If we can't measure two axes simultaneously, we can't falsify either model.
Suggested for: Complementarity of Spin?
I Contextuality, Complementarity, Signaling, and Bell tests
I Direction of motion of particles with total spin under magnetic field
I Spin and generators
I The determination of a particle's spin
I Separability of a Hamiltonian with spin
A Majorana representation of higher spin states
A Spin commutation relations
B How do particles get their spin?
I Complementarity Of One- And Two-Particle Interference
I Derive the probability of spin at arbitrary angle is cos( )
B Destructive Interference
I Curious about an idea of a modified polariser to send signals with QE
I What does decoherence have to do with phases?
A Did rotating polarizer show violations of Bell's Inequality?
B Why does anyone think gravity might collapse wave function?


Chervon, as she styles your little girl into an angel in a garden.
She is perfect for a sunny beach day or a Weekend Brunch!
A 2 piece floral printed set that comes with a sleeveless bow strapped top with a pleated bottom!
Cool and comfortable to wear for your little girl!


but if your smart device vpn end goal is to obtain a job as a Python programmer, instead, youll learn how to write code inside Code Academy and Code School, its about writing software that solves actual problems.
Smart device vpn in USA and United Kingdom!
for this reason, it does throttle smart device vpn free -users bandwidth. This means that the free tier of the ProtonVPN service will not provide the speeds necessary for doing tasks such as streaming in HD.
chapter 7 " Examples " - provides smart device vpn real- examples. Chapter 9 " Related solutions " - lists the relevant solutions. Chapter 8 " Related documentation " - lists the relevant documents.anschließend wird geprüft, muss rechtzeitig einen BAföG-Antrag stellen. Dadurch verbessern sich auch bei mittleren Einkommen die Chancen auf Förderung. übrigens: Zum WS 16/17 erhöhten sich BAföG-Höchstsatz und die Freibeträge deutlich. Wer BAföG beziehen möchte, ob ein Anspruch auf BAföG besteht.
dedicated smart device vpn IP VPN: Reserve Your Own IP in Another Country! PureVPN offers the best dedicated IP VPN from various countries.whatsapp has been a powerful tool to share the ideas of people smart device vpn in the recent times. Many people started using whatsapp that any other social media.
by Published Updated For many years now, theres been a worrying trend developing on the internet. What was once all free and open smart device vpn is now hidden behind paywalls or being blocked and censored.despite major differences between VPNs and cloud computing, what's the Difference Between VPN and Cloud Computing? The two are conflated far too often. It's important to know the differences so you can better understand which one is right for you.
to set up a VPN connection, you will need a server address and your user name and password. VPN connection. This section of ip hotspot user mikrotik the tutorial will show you how to find all of this information.
Changes are not implemented until you click Save and Deploy).
this will include the IP address or hostname of the remote VPN smart device vpn server, step 2 Note the information required to setup the Cisco VPN client on the target network.
Find the Best VPN Service vpn and gdpr in the UK - Top 5 VPN.


Use this cool talking translator to instantly translate any text into any of 54 languages! It also pronounces the translation for you.
The new optional SPEECH TO TEXT feature allows you to translate your English SPOKEN text into any of many languages supported by this app. Stop typing, start speaking!
Unlike other translation apps, this one does not solely depend on one web translator. It produces superior spoken translations!
This Translator also stores previous translations in its database and allows you to prepare a set of translations in advance and play them back later without the need for internet and expensive data roaming.
-Just click to playback. Very useful when trying to tell that taxi driver where you want to go.
This application requires access to the internet to create a new translation.


We are often confronted with lockboxes near the entry of the homes we photograph. Cloning these out is rarely your best option. Instead, the best way to remove things like this from a photo is to "composite them out". So, next time you are in the field and confronted with a potential clone job, first ask yourself if you can use compositing to do the job. This compositing technique can be used with trash cans, TV and lamp power cables, or anything that is moveable within your frame.


text:
Tag Archives: Malcolm Hamilton
Trodigal Cottage: A song by Willie Mitchell
Bobbins's Cottage or Trodigal Cottage. The original cottage is the part on the left hand side of the photo. Beyond that you can see, on the right, Trodigal Farm and beyond that the site where Argyll Colliery once stood. Photo: Jan Nimmo ©
Trodigal Cottage, a song by Willie Mitchell was written about Bobbins's Cottage (or Trodigal Cottage) situated on the Machrihanish – Drumlemble Road at Kilkivan, where the track leads uphill to Kilkivan Cemetery and to Kilkivan Quarry. The cottage took it's name from Robert Hamilton, the father of three miners at Argyll Colliery, Bobby, Malcolm and Stewart. The house was well known as a great meeting place and somewhere to take a dram in good company. Bobbins and his house were immortalised in this song by Willie Mitchell, who was a great friend of Bobbins. Agnes Stewart, Willie's daughter, remembers that her father used to say "The Queen has got four Marys but Bobbins has four Willies!" – they were Willie Colville, Willie Broon (Brown), Willie McArthur and Willie Mitchell.
Trodigal Cottage
It was down by Machrihanish
Some jovial friends and I did meet,
We called at Trodigal Cottage
A kind old cronie there to greet.
Oh the liquor it was plenty,
With foaming beads in every glass,
We joined in song and story,
And heeded not as time did pass.
For it is not time to go, my boys,
To go my boys to go away.
It is not time to go my boys,
We will booze it out till break of day.
Good whisky gives us knowledge
To talk of matters deep and wise.
We took so much of learning,
That from our chairs we could not rise.
It was early in the morning,
Kilkivan's cock did loudly crow,
He sounded us a warning
That to our homes we then should go.
Here's a health to Trodigal Cottage
And the grand old man who long lived there,
We'll ne'er forget the nights we met,
His hospitality to share.
Willlie Mitchell.
Willie Mitchell, songwriter. Photo courtesy of Agnes Stewart ( née Mitchell) ©
Agnes Stewart relates that it was quite amazing the number of people that could be squeezed into the cottage during these sociable occasions. Willie Colville wrote a rhyming couplet about his friend, Willie Mitchell, heading home by bicycle to Campbeltown after a few drams at Bobbins's Cottage:
Wi' erse weel up and heid weel doon, He set his course for Cam'ltoon!
Willie Colville.
Posted in Drumlemble, Miners and poetry., Stories associated with the mine, Uncategorized | Tagged Agnes Stewart, Bobbin's Cottage, Bobby Hamilton, Drumlemble, Kilkivan, Machrihanish, Malcolm Hamilton, Stewart Hamilton, Trodigal, Trodigal Cottage, Willie Broon, Willie Colville, Willie McArthur | 1 Reply
The Argyll Colliery Team of 1952/53
Maggie Allen with her late father's photo of the Argyll Colliery Football team of 1952/53 Photo: Jan Nimmo ©
Maggie Allan brought this photo from her late father's collection along to our first drop-in session at Campbeltown Library. Her father was Coventry Paton (Top, second left). Alex McKinven (author of Kit and Caboodle: The Story of Football in Campbeltown) kindly gave us information about the team in this photo. This is the Argyll Colliery team c. 1952 /53. The colours the team played in were Claret and Amber (Motherwell colours).
Back row – from left to right: 'Donnie' Paterson, Coventry Paton, 'Chas' McKechnie, David Anderson, Malcolm Hamilton and James /Jimmy Thompson.
Front row – Right to left: Neil McLaughlan, Willie Colville, Sam Batey, Stewart Hamilton Charlie Farmer.
Argyll Colliery football team, Campbeltown 1952/53. Photo courtesy of Maggie Allen ©
Posted in Miners and Football, Photos of miners, Uncategorized | Tagged Alex McKincen, Argyll Colliery., Bobby Hamilton, Campbeltown, Charlie Farmer, Chas McKechnie, Coal, Coventry Paton, Football team, Jimmy Thompson, Kintyre, Kit and Caboodle, Maggie Allen, Malcolm Hamilton, Mining, Neil McLaughlan, Sion Batey, Stewart Hamitlon, Willie Colville | Leave a reply
The Sailor's Grave at the Inneans
Posted on November 3, 2016 by theroadtodrumleman
Looking south across the Inneans Bay to the slopes of Cnoc Moy, with Largiebaan out of sight around the corner, 9th October 2016. Photograph: George McSporran ©
Next year (2017) is not only the 50th anniversary of the closure of Argyll Colliery, but the 100th anniversary of the Sailor's Grave in the Inneans Bay.
There follows an extract on the interment from my latest book, A Third Summer in Kintyre, but a little more background is required, particularly on the involvement of miners in the care of the grave.
Few who are familiar with the terrain between Machrihanish and the Mull of Kintyre would dispute the claim that the Inneans Bay is the loveliest spot on that entire rugged Atlantic coastline. For the grandeur of its cliffs, Largiebaan surpasses the Inneans as a scenic wonder, but the Inneans has qualities which Largiebaan lacks: easier accessibility and an extensive level grassy foreshore which lends itself to picnicking and camping.
The Inneans remains a popular destination for local hikers and campers, and the creation of the Kintyre Way in 2006 has made the bay a familiar sight to thousands of visitors who walk that trail.
It is impossible to reckon for how long the Inneans has attracted local walkers, but it has been a destination for ramblers from Machrihanish and Drumlemble, in the main, for more than a century, and has been a camping spot for almost as long.
The peak of the camping phase came just after the Second World War, and the miners were prominent in that. This was, of course, before cheap air travel encouraged foreign holidays.
A small tent, now within the means of everyone, was for these poorly paid miners a financial impossibility, and various improvised shelters were used, and sometimes none: they would lie in the open around a fire which was kept going all night. But in the mid-1960s, the Hamilton brothers, Stewart and Malcolm, acquired a large tent which was lugged, in stages, over the moors from Ballygroggan to the Inneans and pitched permanently in the bay. When it eventually collapsed and rotted, it was replaced in the early 1970s by a little hut built with sloping walls of overlapped planking, which someone later burnt down.
The Hamilton family tent in the Inneans Bay, looking north on a drizzly day. The photo was taken by Angus Martin on 24th september 1967, on his first camping trip to the Inneans, with Iain Campbell, his friend and neighbour in Crosshill Avenue. Being nervous about using the big tent – which, it transpired, was unoccupied – they spent a miserable night in their own small tent with no groundsheet. They discovered later that the Hamiltons were easy about visitors using their tent as long as they behaved themselves and replaced any provisions they used. Photograph by Angus Martin ©
Large groups of miners and friends would spend a week or two camping in the Inneans in the summer. They passed the time by fishing for saithe and pollack from the rocks, snaring rabbits (now apparently extinct in the bay), and, round the camp-fire at night, by story-telling and singing. There was even, in the 1960s, a three-hole golf course in the bay, laid out by the Hamilton brothers and their friend Willie McArthur.
Four members of the Hamilton family. L-R Bobby, Agnes, Stuart and Malcolm. Photograph courtesy of Mary Hamilton ©
And all the time the Sailor's Grave was tended; but the traditional custodians of the site are now either dead or unfit to reach the bay, and the present cross is now broken and rotting. It needs urgent attention and the centenary next year may provide an opportunity to organise a more permanent memorial. It is not my place, however, to implement any plan without public approval, and in particular the approval of those families which have been most closely associated with the care of the grave, so a fund-raising event will be organised in Campbeltown later this year and a solution discussed.
At the Sailor's Grave, 9th October 2016. The dilapidated state of the cross is plain to see. L-R Alastair Thompson, his wife Liz, George McSporran and Angus Martin. Alastair, who has contributed a substantial donation to the Sailor's Grave fund, was previously at the Inneans with Angus Martin on 27th August 1967, approaching 50 years ago. He has lived in Canada for most of his life. Photograph by Sandy McSporran ©
My suggestion, for what it is worth, will be to mount a new cross on top of a small cairn and on to the cairn fix a plaque with the following inscription, or similar: 'Erected by public subscription in May 2017 to mark the human remains found in this bay by Duncan Sinclair, shepherd, Largiebaan, and ceremonially interred in this spot on 11 May. This centenary memorial also recognises the dedicated service of generations of local families who voluntarily tended the grave. 6 May 2017.' Thus, even should the cross never be replaced, the grave will still be marked. A fuller account of this proposal will be found in the latest issue of the Kintyre Magazine (No 80, Autumn 2016, p 26).
I hope that others, who have spent convivial days and nights at the Inneans, will add their memories to this blog. These contributions need not be great literature. Ultimately, it's the stories that count, and the photographs too.
Angus Martin
An extract from A Third Summer in Kintyre by Angus Martin
The Sailor's Grave
The wheel-headed cross which stood at the Sailor's Grave for many years until it was replaced in 1981. It was acquired second-hand from Kilkerran Cemetery by the late Duncan McLachlan, Campbeltown, a painter and signwriter , who added new lettering. The cross was carried to the bay by the late John Kelly, Machrihanish, in his small motor-boat and set up on the grave by the Hamilton brothers, Malcolm and Stewart. Photograph: Agnes Stewart 1977 ©
The cross on the grave, as reported in Another Summer in Kintyre (p 176), is in poor shape: the top had broken off and been tied on with twine. My suggestion, in that book, that a more durable memorial should be erected for the centenary of the interment, May 2017, had already elicited responses. An old school friend in Canada, Alastair Thompson, sent me £200, suggesting I buy myself a bottle of ten-year old 'Ardbeg' malt whisky and put the balance towards the memorial, a generous and inspiring gesture, and John MacDonald later donated £100.
At least six of them have succumbed to natural decay, weathering and the rubbing of animals; in other words, a wooden structure in that exposed spot can't be expected to last longer than about fifteen years on average. As the last of the grave's caretakers die out, has the time come to erect a lasting monument there? Since I have no authority to end the tradition of wood, as the centenary of the burial approaches I'll arrange a public discussion on the question of a replacement memorial. I hope, however, that considerations of longevity will prevail over those of custom.
I referred to 'caretakers', and I'll introduce some of them now. They were assembled, as it were, in an article in the Campbeltown Courier in 1964. I didn't know the article existed until I found it in 2014 while checking the newspaper files for something else. I was 12 when it was published and don't remember seeing it; even if I had seen it, it wouldn't have meant much to me because I'd probably never heard of the Inneans, let alone the Sailor's Grave. But when I read 'For 50 Years They Have Tended Unknown Sailor's Grave', its poignancy hit me. Fifty years further on, I was familiar with the story and with the men and boys mentioned in it, but, of course, most of them are now dead.
The article contains a few errors, and I'll offer corrections, but in a spirit of humility, since my later researches enabled me to pick away the embroidered edges of a story which had been preserved in oral tradition alone. The burial was not reported in either of the local newspapers at the time; in 1917, the pages of the Argyllshire Herald and the Campbeltown Courier were packed with news of the war and with obituaries and photographs of the Kintyre soldiers and sailors who had been killed, wounded or captured on the battlefields of Europe. Information on skeletal remains washed ashore on a remote beach either didn't reach the newspaper offices or was disregarded.
The Courier article opens with the statement that 'For almost 50 years a few Kintyre men have tended the grave of an unknown sailor whose body was washed ashore near Machrihanish during the First World War'. There was no evidence on the corpse to suggest that the man – if a man and not a woman – had been a sailor. When a police report turned up in the Argyll and Bute Archive in Lochgilphead in 1985, the remains were described as skeletal and unidentifiable. However, the assumption that the remains belonged to a sailor was entirely reasonable, and that the grave became known as 'The Sailor's Grave' was almost inevitable. On other coasts, bodies washed ashore were generally assumed to be sailors, and the graves named accordingly.
The article continues:
The story began on one sunny morning in May 1917, when three young men from Drumlemble Village, out amping, came across the sailor's body on the shore south of Machrihanish. They were Donald Munro, John Lambie and Duncan McPhail. After reporting their find to the Receiver of Wreck, a coffin was obtained and the body was buried in a field overlooking the sea. There was no fuss and no funeral service. Since the body was partly decomposed and there was no means of identifying it, the civil and military authorities did not come into the picture.
Of the three men named as the finders, in 1964 only Donald Munro, aged 66 and living at 14 Rhudal Cottages, Drumlemble, was 'still alive and resident in the district'. While researching the Sailor's Grave for Kintyre: The Hidden Past (1984), I encountered two conflicting stories about the finding of the corpse: the one above and one which credited Duncan Sinclair as the finder. Donald Munro was by then dead, but Duncan Sinclair, who had been head shepherd at Ballygroggan, was still alive, living in retirement in Machrihanish. He supplied me with a written account of his role in the corpse's discovery and I judged that to be the 'strongest evidence'. As I remarked in the book: 'It is quite possible, of course, that the body could have been "discovered" several times over, but it certainly could not have been buried several times over.' The counter-claim therefore remains a puzzle. The police report, by P.C. John MacDonald in Machrihanish, is dated 12 May 1917 and records that the body was found by Duncan Sinclair, shepherd at Largiebaan, on Sunday 6 May, and that the 'bones' were buried on 11 May 'above high water mark at the place where they were found'. Duncan Sinclair gave the following statement:
On Sunday 6th May 1917 I was going through the hill attending to my Sheep Stock, and when about two miles from Largiebaan nearer Machrihanish I went along the shore noticed that my dogs observed something on the shore amongst the rocks on the shore. I went to the place where I found a Skeleton lying below a rock, the skull & feet was amissing. And as I was sure it was a Skeleton of a human being I went to Machrihanish and reported the matter to the Constable.
In the account Duncan later gave me, he identified the burial party on 11 May as Machrihanish lobster fisherman Robert Rae, in whose boat the party sailed to the bay, Robert's daughter Nellie, Duncan's sister Annie, and P.C. MacDonald. Duncan was preoccupied with lambing that day and missed the burial.
The 'sailor' wasn't forgotten, though, and the tending of is grave was the focus of the 1964 Courier article. As the anonymous writer observed: 'There is no special organisation, no committee behind this remarkable example of parochial humanity. It has been done so quietly and spontaneously that only a handful of people in Kintyre know where the grave is.' The outline of the grave was described as being 'covered with pebbles, sea shells and glass bottles'. (The latter were doubtless glass flotation-balls which were lost from fishing gear and drifted ashore. These were collectable, until replaced by plastic floats, and could be seen as decorative features on pathways and in gardens.) The cross bore the 'roughly cut out' date 16 May 1917 and the words 'God Knows'. The specificity of the date is misleading, and 'May 1917', which would cover both the date of the body's discovery and of its burial, might now be preferred.
The subsequent cross was made by Neil Brown, a joiner, Campbeltown, and carried to the Inneans Bay on 29th July 1981 by Neil, his son Stephen, his brother-in-law George MacKendrick and Teddy Lafferty who took this photograph. Photograph: Teddy Lafferty ©
Malcolm Hamilton was interviewed for the article. His father, Robert, had tended the grave before him, and Malcolm occasionally took his sons Robert (13) and Leslie (7) with him to the Inneans. In the following week's issue of the Courier, a photograph of the grave was published with two young boys – Robert and Leslie, presumably – flanking the cross. 'As long as I am here,' Malcolm is quoted as saying, 'I will continue to go round. My two boys are very keen on those trips to Eanon and I am trying to encourage them.'
Willie McArthur was also interviewed. When asked why he and the other 'volunteers' gave 'their time and effort to caring for the grave of a man they did not know', Willie replied: 'One or two of us are old soldiers and I suppose it is a feeling of comradeship. Willie McArthur was the only one of all the adults mentioned in the article – the others were Willie Colville, Willie Brown, and Duncan McLachlan – I ever met in the Inneans, and that was in 1980, as recalled in A Summer in Kintyre (pp. 22-25).
A Mystery Verse
Several days after my walk to the Inneans with Don O'Driscoll, Agnes Stewart mentioned to me that Robert Brown had asked her about a 'poem' he'd seen, as a young boy, on the Inneans cross. He recited a couple of lines of it, but she didn't recognise them and didn't remember seeing them there. I did remember lines connected with the Sailor's Grave, but they were out of reach in memory and I abandoned the struggle and fetched my file of Inneans material. I wasn't optimistic of success there either, but the information was in that file and I'd forgotten I had it.
Looking south from Inneans Bay to the north coast of Antrim, 9th October 2016. Photograph: George McSporran ©
When I tape-recorded Duncan McLachlan in February 1981, he had plenty to say about the Sailor's Grave. He had acquired, from Kilkerran Cemetery, a wheel-headed teak cross, of 'Celtic' design, which had marked the grave of an English sailor who drowned during the Second World War and was buried in Kilkerran. The sailor's family had erected a new memorial and the cross was redundant. Duncan, a skilled sign-writer, added the customary lettering to the cross, John Kelly took it to the Inneans in his motor-boat, and it was set up on the grave by the Hamilton brothers and stood there until replaced in 1981.
But Duncan told me he had added something extra to the cross, a verse from a poem. He quoted the couplet, 'Borne ashore by tidal hearse/ created a mystery time cannot pierce', adding: 'Well, it's taken from the Ancient Mariner, isn't it?' These were indeed the lines I had struggled to recall, but I didn't remember them from Samuel Taylor Coleridge's famous ballad, and they didn't, to my ear, sound as though they could belong there, even had Duncan misquoted them slightly. His own uncertainty about the source of the quotation is obvious from his quizzical remark. The question was easily solved, of course. I read the entire Coleridge poem and failed to find the lines, but a further question took its place: what was the source of the couplet?
When I contacted Robert Brown to hear the lines he had recited to Agnes Stewart, they transpired to be substantially the same as those I had heard from Duncan. As Judy and I had done, Robert and his wife Margaret tried internet searches to establish a literary source, likewise without success. I asked him when he had seen the lines on the cross, and he reckoned his first time at the Inneans was with his father, John, around 1955, when he would have been about eight years old.
Angus Martin ©
Posted in Stories associated with the mine, The Inneans | Tagged A Third Summer in Kintyre, Angus Martin, Argyll, Argyll Colliery., Ballygroggan, Campbeltown, Coal, Donald Munro, Duncan McLachlan, Duncan McMillan, Duncan McPhail, Duncan Sinclair, Enneans Bay, Inneans, Inneans Bay, Jim Lambie, John Kelly, Kintyre, Machrihanish, Malcolm Hamilton, Mining, Neil Brown, Sailor's Grave, Stewart Hamilton, Teddy Lafferty, The Road to Drumleman, Wiilie Brown, Willie Colville | 2 Replies


Spring is in the air, and so is Scarborough Faire! (Or rather, Scarborough Renaissance Festival as it is officially known!) Explore this hallowed event, now in its 38th year, in 12 pages of full color glory! You can even acquire a pair of admission tickets to this event by purchasing a new or renewal subscription of any length and using coupon code SRF18 during checkout.
Also in this issue are an article about Lady of the Lakes Renaissance Faire, based in Florida; the adventures of Sir Brendan, an Irish monk who may have visited what is today known as North America centuries before the Vikings did; and a cornucopia of other articles, recipes, humor and trivia that are sure to enthrall you until issue 116.


"What do you mean?" exclaimed Nicodemus.
"How can an old man go back into his mother's womb and be born again?"
Jesus replied, "I assure you, no one can enter the Kingdom of God without being born of water and the Spirit.
Jesus has tried to move Nicodemus from a philosophical discussion to a personal one. "Unless you are born again, you cannot see the Kingdom of God," Jesus told him (John 3:3). Nicodemus tries to pull the discussion back to a philosophical one by couching it in human terms, "How can an old man go back into his mother's womb and be born again?" Jesus reminds him that "no one," not even a respected high council member and teacher, can enter the Kingdom without the water/Spirit birth. As a respected teacher, this requirement would have been hard to hear. We can hear him think in shock, "I must be baptized like a Gentile or like those miscreants that John the Baptizer is baptizing? I must have something radically done by the Spirit of God?" Yes! That is Jesus' point. Clinging to his old righteousness, surpassing others in religious practice, reputation, and effort, wasn't going to cut it with God. Only a new birth would do — a birth from above, a birth facilitated by God. He had to stop his earthbound thinking. He had to open himself to God's new work through the Spirit, or he would miss the glory of God's Kingdom. The very best that Israel had to offer couldn't enter the Kingdom without faith in Jesus and a new birth by the power of the Holy Spirit.
O righteous Father, forgive me for trying to hang on to my earthbound righteousness and religious practice. I know that I could not be a part of your Kingdom without being spiritually reborn. Thank you for providing the sacrifice that atones for my sin. Thank you for providing me the means to confess my faith in Jesus and to share with him in his death, burial and resurrection. Thank you for remaking me by the power of your Holy Spirit. Please help me share this grace with others. In Jesus' name, I pray. Amen.


text:
Florida governor opens mansion to troopers heading to areas hit by Hurricane Michael
October 12, 2018 / 4:19 PM / CBS/AP
Massive recovery underway in Florida
Florida Gov. Rick Scott has opened up the governor's mansion in Tallahassee to state troopers on their way to areas hit hard by Hurricane Michael. Scott and first lady Ann Scott had dinner on Thursday with 50 troopers and 35 of them slept on cots inside the mansion prior to their deployment.
The governor's office said it would continue to use the mansion as a shelter for law enforcement as long as necessary.
There are 600 state troopers assisting with the response and recovery in Florida's Panhandle and Big Bend area.
"These law enforcement officers are leaving the comfort of their homes and company of their families to deploy for critical hurricane response and recovery missions and we cannot thank all of our law enforcement enough for their service," Scott said in a statement.
Scott thanked the Publix supermarket chain for "generously" donating food to feed the troopers during their stay.
Florida Highway Patrol officers eat dinner in the Florida Governor's Mansion on Thursday, Oct. 11, 2018. Office of Florida Governor Rick Scott
Most of Florida's capital is without power, but the mansion has generators to provide electricity. The residence is located just north of the state Capitol. As of Friday morning, more than 1.4 million utility customers from Florida to Virginia were without power.
The death toll from Hurricane Michael, which made landfall near Mexico Beach, Florida, Wednesday, has jumped to at least 13, and authorities expect the number to rise.
"We're still in life-safety mode," FEMA Administrator Brock Long told CBS News. "We're not even close to having discussions on rebuilding yet."
My wife, @FLAnnScott, & I are sheltering nearly 50 Florida Highway Patrol officers in the FL Governor's Mansion during their deployment for Hurricane Michael. Our first responders have saved a lot of lives this week it's the least we could do. pic.twitter.com/fZutgSkVJc
— Rick Scott (@FLGovScott) October 12, 2018
First published on October 12, 2018 / 4:19 PM


text:
Wastewater System: Collection, Treatment & Disposal
The Bear Valley Water District (District) provides sanitary sewer collection, treatment and disposal for approximately 650 residential and commercial Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDUs) in the Alpine County community of Bear Valley. The District's service area is comprised of approximately 3000 acres located primarily north of California State Highway 4. The District serves the developed private, residential and commercial areas of the Bear Valley village as well as the developed adjoining federal recreational lands including the United States Forest Service's (USFS) Lake Alpine Resort and campgrounds, special use permit (SUP) residential cabins and the Bear Valley Mountain downhill ski resort. The District's wastewater treatment and disposal facility (WWTF) is regulated by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) under Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Order No. 5-01-208 and Order No. R5-2016-0045-01.
The District's collection system includes approximately 83,000 linear feet or nearly 16 miles of gravity sewer collection pipeline and 8,560 linear feet or about 1.5 miles of force main pressured lines as well as 160 manholes and 4 pump stations. The pipeline ranges in size from 4 inches to 12 inches in diameter. The 4 pump stations lift wastewater throughout the collection system as it travels to the wastewater treatment facility.
Wastewater from the colletion system flows to the District's wastewater treatment plant located in the meadow on the south side of Highway 4. The District provides secondary treatment with a facility design flow of 0.5 million gallons per day (MGD) (500,000 gallons per day) while the system has safely received over 1.5 MGD during significant hydraulic events. The goal of the treatment process is to remove as many pollutants in the wastewater as possible to minimize the risks to public health and impact on the environment and return the treated wastewater safely back to the environment.
Preliminary treatment at the District's main pump station (headworks) consists of shredding (comminutor) and grit removal before the influent reaches the primary sedimentation tank where the settable solids are allowed to fall to the bottom of the tank. Effluent flow is then measured during transfer via three, 10 horse power (HP) Paco pumps to a 14.18 MG, two cell, aerated treatment lagoon for secondary biological nutrient removal.
While in the two cell lagoon system, air is delivered via one 40 HP, variable frequency drive (VFD) Gardner Denver positive displacement blower to thirty six (36) - 18" diameter, submerged helixor, coarse bubble diffusers. Through this biological treatment method, the constituents are largely consumed and/or sequestered. Inline YSI sensors communicate with the VFD blower by way of the SCADA system to keep dissolved oxygen and suspended solids at optimum levels. Treated effluent from the aerated lagoon is then chlorinated during transfer via (2) - 375 gallon per minute (GPM) Paco pumps through a 12,000 gallon chlorine contact tank. The chlorinated effluent is then placed into storage and receives further treatment in a 76.4 MG effluent polishing reservoir.
Wastewater Disposal
During the irrigation season, typically late spring through early autumn, the polished effluent is disposed of through spray irrigation on up to approximately 80 acres of sprayfields: 40 acres of land which is authorized by Special Use Permit (SUP) from the USFS and 40 acres under private lease through 2048. Both the leased disposal area and the permitted land have been in service since before the installation of the groundwater monitoring wells (approximately 40 years for the leased land) at the site.
Effluent disposal via spray irrigation involves the disbursement of the effluent through low impact, high uniformity, Nelson sprinkler heads upon soils and vegetation within the disposal area. The average monthly application rates during the peak disposal months range from approximately 0.4 to 0.7 acre feet (0.128 MG – 0.222 MG) per acre per month. The water is allowed to percolate into the soil and evapotranspirate into the atmosphere. WDRs Order No. 5-01-208 limit application of wastewater to reasonable rates considering soil, climate, and irrigation management system.
Polished effluent may also be discharged to surface waters as a means of effluent disposal. To protect surface waters, sodium bisulfite is used to remove the chlorine residual. The dechlorinated water is then discharged to Bloods Creek. The discharge is strictly monitored by plant personnel to ensure a quality effluent that complies with state-regulated limits to meet permit compliance under Order No. R5-2016-0045-01.