text:
This movie requires Flash Player 8. Download Flash Player 8

Creation Vs. Evolution

Search :

7 Reasons the Multiverse Is Not a Valid Alternative to God [Part 2]

by  Jeff Miller, Ph.D.

[EDITOR’S NOTE: Part 1 of this two-part series appeared in the April issue. Part 2 follows below and continues, without introductory comments, where the first article ended.]

Problem #4: Unscientific

As with inflation theory, the multiverse is untestable and unobservable, making it unscientific. Astrophysicist and Distinguished Professor at Johns Hopkins University Adam Riess and astrophysicist Mario Livio, previously at the Space Telescope Science Institute, stated: “Even just mentioning the multiverse idea…raises the blood pressure of some physicists. The notion seems hard to swallow and harder to testperhaps signifying the end of the classical scientific method as we know it. Historically this method has required that hypotheses should be directly testable by new experiments or observations.”1 But observation, direct testing, and experimentation are not possible with the multiverse. Ellis, in apparent frustration, admitted:

Similar claims [about the existence of multiverses—JM] have been made since antiquity by many cultures. What is new is the assertion that the multiverse is a scientific theory, with all that implies about being mathematically rigorous and experimentally testable. I am skeptical about this claim. I do not believe the existence of those other universes has been proved—or ever could be. Proponents of the multiverse, as well as greatly enlarging our conception of physical reality, are implicitly redefining what is meant byscience”…. The various “proofs,” in effect, propose that we should accept a theoretical explanation instead of insisting on observational testing. But such testing has, up until now, been the central requirement of the scientific endeavor, and we abandon it at our peril. If we weaken the requirement of solid data, we weaken the core reason for the success of science over the past centuries.2

Krauss noted that “for many people, multiverses…are indications of how far fundamental physics may appear to be diverging from what is otherwise considered to be sound empirical science.”3 Regarding string theory, inflation, and the multiverse theory, Ellis and Silk insisted, “We agree with theoretical physicist Sabine Hossenfelder: post-empirical science is an oxymoron…. In our view, the issue boils down to clarifying one question: what potential observational or experimental evidence is there that would persuade you that the theory is wrong and lead you to abandoning it? If there is none, it is not a scientific theory.”4 Buchanan, writing in New Scientist about the multiverse, bewilderedly said,

[F]antasy is the very word that occurs to many—including some physicists—when they hear some of the ideas popular in cosmology…. [I]nflationary cosmologists have opened the speculative throttle so fully that physicists now talk routinely of such things as an infinitude of parallel universes, or a “multiverse”…. Is this still science? Or has inflationary cosmology veered towards something akin to religion? Some physicists wonder….5

By the end of the article, Buchanan’s answer was clear. “In the end, this [i.e., the multiverse—JM] isn’t science so much as philosophy using the language of science.”6

Lee Smolin is a theoretical physicist, faculty member at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, and adjunct Professor of Physics at the University of Waterloo. In an article titled, “You Think There’s a Multiverse? Get Real,” he forthrightly argued the following:

[T]he multiverse theory has difficulty making any firm predictions and threatens to take us out of the realm of science. These other universes are unobservable and because chance dictates the random distribution of properties across universes, positing the existence of a multiverse does not let us deduce anything about our universe beyond what we already know. As attractive as the idea may seem, it is basically a sleight of hand, which converts an explanatory failure into an apparent explanatory success…. We started out trying to explain why the universe is so special, and we end up being asked to believe that our universe is one of an infinite number of universes with random properties. This makes me suspect that there is a basic but unexamined assumption about the laws of nature that must be overturned…. [T]he multiverse fails as a scientific hypothesis in spite of the fact that simple versions of inflation made some predictions that have been confirmed. The idea of inflation is plagued by the need to explain how the initial conditions were chosen…. [W]e had to invent the multiverse. And thus with an infinite ensemble of unobservable entities we leave the domain of science behind. In some sense, the multiverse embodies the unreal ensemble of all possible solutions to the laws of physics, imagined as elements of an invented ensemble of bubble universes. But this just trades one imaginary, unreal ensemble for another.7

Folger admitted, “The idea is controversial. Critics say it doesn’t even qualify as a scientific theory because the existence of other universes cannot be proved or disproved…. Does it make sense to talk about other universes if they can never be detected?... [Cambridge University astrophysicist Martin] Rees, an early supporter of Linde’s ideas, agrees that it may never be possible to observe other universes directly.”8

Naturalists routinely argue that Creation is “unscientific” and therefore should not be taught in science classrooms. After all, God cannot be directly observed, and Creation and Noah’s Flood cannot be reproduced scientifically. In truth, direct evidence for the truth of the biblical model is available9 and abundant indirect evidence exists to substantiate the biblical model as well.10 However, even if it was the case that Creation is unscientific, multiverse theory and inflation (along with the Big Bang) should, on the same grounds that naturalists use, be deemed unscientific by naturalists and left out of the science classroom. Don’t hold your breath that such rational, consistent thinking will prevail among naturalistic scientists. After all, “If you don’t want God, you’d better have a multiverse,”11 and according to Harvard University evolutionary geneticist Richard Lewontin, naturalistic scientists “cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”12

Problem #5: Origin of the Multiverse

For the sake of argument, let us concede the existence of the multiverse. Next question: where did the multiverse come from? Ellis noted,

Many physicists who talk about the multiverse…assume a multiverse context for their theories without worrying about how it comes to be—which is what concerns cosmologists…. Scientists proposed the multiverse as a way of resolving deep issues about the nature of existence, but the proposal leaves the ultimate issues unresolved. All the same issues that arise in relation to the universe arise again in relation to the multiverse. If the multiverse exists, did it come into existence through necessity, chance or purpose? That is a metaphysical question that no physical theory can answer for either the universe or the multiverse.13

Recall that Finkel wrote concerning the multiverse, “This is all highly speculative, but it’s possible that to give birth to a new universe you first need to take a bunch of matter from an existing universe, crunch it down, and seal it off.”14 If a Universe had to first be in existence before the new one was born, how did it all get started? And where did the “strings” of string theory come from? The multiverse theory still does not answer the ultimate question.

That ultimate question is precisely what Richard Webb titled a 2016 article in New Scientist: “Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?” One of the hopes about the multiverse theory is that it could explain why our laws of physics are what they are. As we have highlighted elsewhere, they certainly could not write themselves.15 In the multiverse, every possible law would be expected to happen in some Universe at some time—and possibly many times throughout eternity. But again, the ultimate question is not answered. Webb highlights that truth: “A popular idea is that all the other possible laws of physics—including no laws—exist elsewhere in a ‘multiverse’ of all possible worlds. In that case, why a multiverse?”16 Theoretical physicist, cosmologist, astrobiologist, and Professor at Arizona State University Paul Davies weighed in as well in an article titled “Taking Science on Faith”:

The multiverse theory is increasingly popular, but it doesn’t so much explain the laws of physics as dodge the whole issue. There has to be a physical mechanism to make all those universes and bestow bylaws on them. This process will require its own laws, or meta-laws. Where do they come from? The problem has simply been shifted up a level from the laws of the universe to the meta-laws of the multiverse.17

In 2011, he said, “You still have to explain the multiverse. That still has laws. You need a Universe generating mechanism.”18 According to Davies, the multiverse theory merely moves the goal post. It does not really answer the ultimate question. Michio Kaku, theoretical physicist of the City College of New York, agreed, but went even further: “[I]n string theory, there are other universes out there. There’s a multiverse of universes…. [T]he question is, ‘Where did the multiverse come from?’ You could argue, therefore, that maybe you need a god to create the multiverse, or a creator to create string theory, perhaps.”19

While there are different versions of the multiverse theory which have been suggested, according to Ellis, “[n]early all cosmologists today” accept the type of multiverse wherein “[e]ach [Universe—JM] has a different initial distribution of matter, but the same laws of physics operate in all.”20 As astronomer Shannon Hall wrote in New Scientist, the other universes of the hypothetical multiverse are “all bound by the same laws of physics” as ours. She reasoned, “At least that’s the assumption: those laws don’t change over the distances we can see, so there is no reason to think they will suddenly transform beyond them.”21 Recall again that in the multiverse model, in order to form a new Universe you “need to take a bunch of matter from an existing universe, crunch it down, and seal it off.”22 It stands to reason that if one Universe starts from another, then the same laws would apply to both, which agrees with what Ellis stated. But if that is the case, then the same laws which prohibit matter and energy from creating themselves or existing forever in our Universe23 hold in those other Universes as well.24 The origin of it all must still be accounted for. If matter and energy in our Universe come from “a neighbouring universe leaking into ours,”25 the matter in that Universe still has to have come from somewhere. In the words of evolutionary biologist of Oxford University Richard Dawkins, “Of course it’s counterintuitive that you can get something from nothing. Of course common sense doesn’t allow you to get something from nothing.”26 Reason still leads to an ultimate Creator of everything.

Problem #6: The Multiverse Admits the Existence of the Supernatural

Recall what Ellis and Silk wrote in 2014 in Nature: “This year, debates in physics circles took a worrying turn. Faced with difficulties in applying fundamental theories to the observed Universe, some researchers called for a change in how theoretical physics is done.”27 Ironically, the “difficulties” theoretical physicists have encountered have forced many naturalists to go beyond nature to try to explain. As Smolin said, “We had to invent the multiverse,”28 and according to Parker, it was from our “imagination.”29 The use of our imagination to determine where we came from certainly sounds like today’s “science” is moving ever further into the realm of fiction.

Regardless, notice that according to many physicists, something beyond the current definition of science is needed to explain certain things—i.e., the existence of the unobservable, supernatural realm is demanded by the evidence. Notice how Davies put it: “Clearly, then, both religion and science are founded on faith—namely, on belief in the existence of something outside the universe, like an unexplained God or an unexplained set of physical laws, maybe even a huge ensemble of unseen universes, too.”30

Besides the existence of the laws of physics, what kind of “difficulties” are physicists encountering that are forcing them to conclude that something outside of the Universe exists, and therefore, that they need to “invent” the multiverse to avoid God? Many have articulated well the problem. Read on to see a great lesson by naturalists on the need for a supernatural Designer for the Universe. According to Folger, “The idea that the universe was made just for us—known as the anthropic principle—debuted in 1973.”31 Since then, the principle has grown in strength. Consider, for example:

  • In a 2011 article, under the heading “Seven Questionable Arguments” for the multiverse, Ellis discusses argument number four:

    A remarkable fact about our universe is that physical constants have just the right values needed to allow for complex structures, including living things…. I agree that the multiverse is a possible valid explanation for [fine tuning examples—JM]…; arguably, it is the only scientifically based option we have right now. But we have no hope of testing it observationally.32

    [Notice that the multiverse is “the only scientifically based option,” and yet “we have no hope of testing it observationally.” Doesn’t that make it not a “scientifically based option”?]

  • By 2014, Ellis and Silk went even further:

    The multiverse is motivated by a puzzle: why fundamental constants of nature, such as the fine-structure constant that characterizes the strength of electromagnetic interactions between particles and the cosmological constant associated with the acceleration of the expansion of the Universe, have values that lie in the small range that allows life to exist…. Some physicists consider that the multiverse has no challenger as an explanation of many otherwise bizarre coincidences. The low value of the cosmological constant—known to be 120 factors of 10 smaller than the value predicted by quantum field theory—is difficult to explain, for instance.33

  • John Rennie, the editor for Scientific American, noted,

    The basic laws of physics work equally well forward or backward in time, yet we perceive time to move in one direction only—toward the future. Why?34

  • Carroll, along the same lines, noted that

    [i]f the observable universe were all that existed, it would be nearly impossible to account for the arrow of time in a natural way.35

  • According to Smolin,

    Everything we know suggests that the universe is unusual. It is flatter, smoother, larger and emptier than a “typical” universe predicted by the known laws of physics. If we reached into a hat filled with pieces of paper, each with the specifications of a possible universe written on it, it is exceedingly unlikely that we would get a universe anything like ours in one pick—or even a billion. The challenge that cosmologists face is to make sense of this specialness. One approach to this question is inflation—the hypothesis that the early universe went through a phase of exponentially fast expansion. At first, inflation seemed to do the trick. A simple version of the idea gave correct predictions for the spectrum of fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background. But a closer look shows that we have just moved the problem further back in time. To make inflation happen at all requires us to fine-tune the initial conditions of the universe.36

  • Folger quotes Linde in Discover magazine:

    “We have a lot of really, really strange coincidences, and all of these coincidences are such that they make life possible,” Linde says. Physicists don’t like coincidences. They like even less the notion that life is somehow central to the universe, and yet recent discoveries are forcing them to confront that very idea…. Call it a fluke, a mystery, a miracle. Or call it the biggest problem in physics. Short of invoking a benevolent creator, many physicists see only one possible explanation: Our universe may be but one of perhaps infinitely many universes in an inconceivably vast multiverse…. Advocates argue that, like it or not, the multiverse may well be the only viable non-religious explanation for what is often called the “fine-tuning problem”—the baffling observation that the laws of the universe seem custom-tailored to favor the emergence of life…. [Andrei Linde:] “And if we double the mass of the electron, life as we know it will disappear. If we change the strength of the interaction between protons and electrons, life will disappear. Why are there three space dimensions and one time dimension? If we had four space dimensions and one time dimension, then planetary systems would be unstable and our version of life would be impossible. If we had two space dimensions and one time dimension, we would not exist,” he says…. [I]f there is no multiverse, where does that leave physicists? “If there is only one universe,” Carr says, “you might have to have a fine-tuner. If you don’t want God, you’d better have a multiverse.”37

  • Stuart Clark and Richard Webb, writing in New Scientist, said,

    We can’t explain the numbers that rule the universe…the different strengths of weak, strong and electromagnetic forces, for example, or the masses of the particles it introduces…. Were any of them to have even marginally different values, the universe would look very different. The Higgs boson’s mass, for example, is just about the smallest it can be without the universe’s matter becoming unstable. Similar “fine-tuning” problems bedevil cosmology…. Why is the carbon atom structured so precisely as to allow enough carbon for life to exist in the universe?38

  • Greene, commenting on Professor of Theoretical Physics at Stanford University Leonard Susskind’s thinking about the multiverse, said,

    Susskind was suggesting that string theory augments this grand cosmological unfolding by adorning each of the universes in the multiverse with a different shape for the extra dimensions. With or without string theory, the multiverse is a highly controversial schema, and deservedly so. It not only recasts the landscape of reality, but shifts the scientific goal posts. Questions once deemed profoundly puzzling—why do nature’s numbers, from particle masses to force strengths to the energy suffusing space, have the particular values they do?—would be answered with a shrug…. Most physicists, string theorists among them, agree that the multiverse is an option of last resort….  Looking back, I’m gratified at how far we’ve come but disappointed that a connection to experiment continues to elude us.39

  • Mary-Jane Rubenstein, writing in New Scientist, said,

    Here’s the dilemma: if the universe began with a quantum particle blipping into existence, inflating godlessly into space-time and a whole zoo of materials, then why is it so well suited for life? For medieval philosophers, the purported perfection of the universe was the key to proving the existence of God. The universe is so fit for intelligent life that it must be the product of a powerful, benevolent external deity. Or, as popular theology might put it today: all this can’t be an accident. Modern physics has also wrestled with this “fine-tuning problem,” and supplies its own answer. If only one universe exists, then it is strange to find it so hospitable to life, when nearly any other value for the gravitational or cosmological constants would have produced nothing at all. But if there is a “multiverse” of many universes, all with different constants, the problem vanishes: we’re here because we happen to be in one of the universes that works. No miracles, no plan, no creator.40

Notice: Physicists cannot help but acknowledge the truth of the Teleological Argument for the existence of God. Design demands a designer, and the Universe has abundant evidence of design (i.e., fine-tuning). The multiverse is a concession by naturalists that we have been right all along: there exists an “unseen realm.” But rather than concede God, naturalists invent the evidence-less, imaginary multiverse. Ironically all the while, the multiverse is itself a supernatural option—albeit, one without any rules concerning how we should behave, making it attractive to many.

Problem #7: Would the Existence of the Multiverse Actually Prove the Existence of God?

According to multiverse theory, “All that can happen, happens” somewhere in the many Universes that make up the multiverse.41 Ellis explained concerning the multiverse that “[i]n seeking to explain why nature obeys certain laws and not others, some physicists and philosophers have speculated that nature never made any such choice: all conceivable laws apply somewhere. The idea is inspired in part by quantum mechanics, which, as Murray Gell-Mann memorably put it, holds that everything not forbidden is compulsory.”42 Sokol agrees: “In the multiverse of eternal inflation, everything that can happen has happened—and will probably happen again.”43 In 2014, Lisa Grossman authored an article in New Scientist titled “Quantum Twist Kills the Multiverse: Goodbye Eternal Multiverse, Hello the End of Everything.” Therein, she explained:

In such an infinite multiverse, everything that has even a slight chance of happening is virtually certain to happen—you just need to wait long enough. Some theorists have pointed out that, taken to its logical conclusion, that includes the spontaneous aggregation of matter so that it creates self-aware, disembodied brains. It’s the same kind of logic that says an infinite number of monkeys typing randomly would eventually produce the complete works of Shakespeare. “It sounds like something a bunch of college sophomores would discuss while high. It doesn’t sound like a real scientific problem,” says Scott Aaronson at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.44

It’s certainly a ludicrous idea—“pure speculation” in the words of Ellis45—but that is what multiverse theory suggests. Buchanan explained: “In the multiverse, every conceivable world exists, and individuals identical to you and I live out parallel lives in places we cannot have access to.”46 Gefter said that in the multiverse, “[e]very conceivable value of dark energy or anything else will exist an infinite number of times among the infinite number of universes, and any universal theory of physics valid throughout the multiverse must reproduce all those values.”47 Recall that Steinhardt, writing in Nature, criticized the multiverse concept: “Scanning over all possible bubbles in the multiverse, everything that can physically happen does happen an infinite number of times. No experiment can rule out a theory that allows for all possible outcomes.”48

Now, that said: if in the multiverse, “all that can happen happens” and “every conceivable world exists”; if “everything that has even a slight chance of happening is virtually certain to happen”; if “anything” “will exist an infinite number of times”; if “everything that can happen has happened—and will probably happen again”; if “everything not forbidden is compulsory”; then why would it not be the case that a God with the characteristics of the one in the Bible would exist in at least one of those Universes? Does the multiverse not demand that God exists? If not, why not? And if a God like the one in the Bible exists, then that God is omnipresent—He is everywhere and every-when (cf. Psalm 139:7-10; Proverbs 15:3; Ecclesiastes 12:4; 1 Timothy 1:16-17). That means that if He exists in another Universe somewhere, He must exist here as well.

In this article, we have intentionally quoted extensively from emeritus distinguished Professor of Mathematics and Applied Mathematics at the University of Cape Town in South Africa George Ellis since he is a well-respected cosmologist among naturalistic scientists and a key player in the multiverse discussion. Ellis thoroughly grasps why the multiverse is being championed. He understands what is at stake for naturalism, but he also understands that the multiverse theory has significant problems. Consider what he said in his critique of the multiverse in Scientific American in 2011:

Proponents of the multiverse make one final argument: that there are no good alternatives. As distasteful as scientists might find the proliferation of parallel worlds, if it is the best explanation, we would be driven to accept it; conversely, if we are to give up the multiverse, we need a viable alternative. This exploration of alternatives depends on what kind of explanation we are prepared to accept. Physicists’ hope has always been that the laws of nature are inevitable—that things are the way they are because there is no other way they might have been—but we have been unable to show this is true. Other options exist, too. The Universe might be pure happenstance—it just turned out that way. Or things might in some sense be meant to be the way they are—purpose or intent somehow underlies existence.49

It is significant that Ellis and Silk acknowledge, “In our view, cosmologists should heed mathematician David Hilbert’s warning: although infinity is needed to complete mathematics, it occurs nowhere in the physical Universe.”50 The evidence is clear: there must be Something infinite beyond the physical Universe that brought about this Universe and its laws or ordinances. There is zero evidence for a multiverse being that supernatural realm. Indeed, by cosmologists’ own admissions, the multiverse concoction “leapt out of the pages of fiction into scientific journals”; is “hard to swallow”; is a “sleight of hand”; “dodge[s] the whole issue”; is “imaginary”; and is an “oxymoron.” But on the other hand, there is ample evidence that the God of the Bible exists.51 He wrote the “ordinances of the heavens” and “set their dominion” over the Universe (Job 38:33). By His word, “the heavens were made, and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth” (Psalm 33:6).

1 Adam G. Riess and Mario Livio (2016), “The Puzzle of Dark Energy,” Scientific American, 314[3]:42, emp. added.

2 George F.R. Ellis (2011), “Does the Multiverse Really Exist?” Scientific American, 305[2]:40-43, emp. added.

3 Lawrence M. Krauss (2014), “A Beacon from the Big Bang,” Scientific American, 311[4]:67, emp. added.

4 George Ellis and Joe Silk (2014), “Defend the Integrity of Physics,” Nature, 516[7531]:322-323, December, emp. added.

5 Mark Buchanan (2014), “When Does Multiverse Speculation Cross into Fantasy?” New Scientist, 221[2952]:46-47, January 18, https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22129 520-900-when-does-multiverse-speculation-cross-into-fantasy/, emp. added.

6 Ibid., p. 47, emp. added.

7 Lee Smolin (2015), “You Think There’s a Multiverse? Get Real,” New Scientist, 225[3004]:24-25, January 17, emp. added.

8 Tim Folger (2008), “Science’s Alternative to an Intelligent Creator: the Multiverse Theory,” DiscoverMagazine.com, November 10.

9 Kyle Butt (2007), Behold! The Word of God (Montgomery, AL: Apologetics Press), /pdfs/e-books_pdf/ Behold%20the%20Word%20of%20God.pdf; Jeff Miller (2014b), “Bill Nye/Ken Ham Debate: Tying Up Really Loose Ends,” Reason & Revelation, 34[4]:38-59, http://apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=1152.

10 See the following for a discussion of indirect evidence in science: Jeff Miller (2013b), “‘Unlike Naturalists, You Creationists Have a Blind Faith,’” Reason & Revelation, 33[7]:76-83, http://apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=1125&article=2164.

11 As quoted in Folger, emp. added.

12 Richard Lewontin (1997), “Billions and Billions of Demons,” The New York Review, January 9, p. 31.

13 Ellis, pp. 40-43, emp. added.

14 Michael Finkel (2014), “Our Star, The Sun, Will Die A Quiet Death,” National Geographic, 225[3]:102, March, emp. added.

15 Jeff Miller (2012), “The Laws of Science—by God,” Reason & Revelation, 32[12]:137-140, http://apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=1103&article=2072.

16 Richard Webb (2016), “Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing?” New Scientist, 231[3089]:32, September 3, emp. added.

17 Paul Davies (2007), “Taking Science on Faith,” The New York Times, November 24, emp. added, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/24/opinion/24davies.html?_r=0.

18 “The Creation Question: A Curiosity Conversation” (2011), Discovery Channel, August 7.

19 Ibid.

20 Ellis, p. 38, emp. added.

21 Shannon Hall (2017), “Infinite Frontiers,” New Scientist, 233[3109]:28.

22 Finkel, p. 102, emp. added.

23 Concerning the eternality of matter/energy, some physicists have acknowledged that even the multiverse could not exist forever [Lisa Grossman (2014), “Quantum Twist Kills the Multiverse,” New Scientist, 222[2969]:9, May 17].

24 Jeff Miller (2013a), “Evolution and the Laws of Science: The Laws of Thermodynamics,” Apologetics Press, http://apologeticspress.org/APContent.aspx?category=9&article=2786&topic=57.

25 Joshua Sokol (2015), “A Brush with a Universe Next Door,” New Scientist, 228[3045]:8, October 31.

26 Richard Dawkins and George Pell (2012), “Q&A: Religion and Atheism,” ABC Australia, April 9, http;//www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s3469101.htm.

27 Ellis and Silk, p. 321, emp. added.

28 Smolin, p. 25.

29 Lawson Parker (2014), “Cosmic Questions,” , 225[4], April, center tearout.

30 Davies.

31 Folger, emp. added.

32 Ellis, p. 42, emp. added.

33 Ellis and Silk, p. 322.

34 John Rennie, Editor’s Note in Sean M. Carroll (2008), “The Cosmic Origins of Time’s Arrow,” Scientific American, 298[6]:48, June.

35 Sean M. Carroll (2008), “The Cosmic Origins of Time’s Arrow,” Scientific American, 298[6]:57, June, emp. added.

36 Smolin, p. 24, emp. added.

37 Folger, emp. added.

38 Stuart Clark and Richard Webb (2016), “Six Principles/Six Problems/Six Solutions,” New Scientist, 231[3092]:33, emp. added.

39 Brian Greene (2015), “Why String Theory Still Offers Hope We Can Unify Physics,” Smithsonian Magazine, January, http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/string-theory-about-unravel-180953637/?no-ist, emp. added.

40 Mary-Jane Rubenstein (2015), “God vs. the Multiverse,” New Scientist, 228[3052/3053]:64, December 19/26, emp. added.

41 Ellis, p. 42.

42 Ibid., emp. added.

43 Sokol, p. 8, emp. added.

44 Grossman, p. 9, emp. added.

45 Ellis, p. 42.

46 p. 46, emp. added.

47 Amanda Gefter (2012), “Bang Goes the Theory,” New Scientist, 214[2871]:34, June 30, emp. added.

48 Paul Steinhardt (2014), “Big Bang Blunder Bursts the Multiverse Bubble,” Nature on-line, 510[7503]:9, June 5, http://www.nature.com/news/big-bang-blunder-bursts-the-multiverse-bubble-1.15346.

49 Ellis, p. 43, emp. added.

50 Ellis and Silk, p. 322, emp. added.

51 Eric Lyons and Kyle Butt (2014), “7 Reasons to Believe in God,” Reason & Revelation, 34[10]:110-119, http://apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=1175; Jeff Miller (2015b), “How Can a Person Know Which God Exists?” Reason & Revelation, 35[5]:52-53, http://apologeticspress.org/apPubPage.aspx?pub=1&issue=1189&article=2506.

Special thanks to Dr. Mike Houts (AP Auxiliary Scientist and NASA nuclear engineer) for reviewing this article and offering helpful suggestions.

Copyright © 2017 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

We are happy to grant permission for items in the "Creation Vs. Evolution" section to be reproduced in part or in their entirety, as long as the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) the author’s name must remain attached to the materials; (4) textual alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden; (5) Some illustrations (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, etc.) are not the intellectual property of Apologetics Press and as such cannot be reproduced from our site without consent from the person or organization that maintains those intellectual rights; (6) serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7) articles, excepting brief quotations, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited or altered from their original content and that credit is given to Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles were taken.

For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:

Apologetics Press
230 Landmark Drive
Montgomery, Alabama 36117
Phone (334) 272-8558


Content-Type: application/http; msgtype=response

WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: text/html

WARC-Type: response

text:
This movie requires Flash Player 8. Download Flash Player 8

Issue Features
View this issue online as it looks in print
Reason and Revelation Volume 28 #6

New Creation DVD & Your Tax Check

We at Apologetics Press have committed ourselves to producing more DVD resources for both adults and children due to the fact that many Americans have upgraded to these ever improving forms of electronic communication. In that spirit, A.P. has just released the first offering in our Pillars of Faith seminar series: Truth Be Told. Sub-titled “A Seminar Exposing the Myth of Evolution,” this outstanding, six-lesson DVD contains live presentations of the cutting-edge information that Kyle Butt and Eric Lyons provide in the seminars that they conduct around the country. They present evidence that refutes evolution, defends Creation, and explains how dinosaurs fit into the biblical framework. Designed to examine the Creation/Evolution controversy in light of reason and revelation, this evangelistic tool is an excellent means to reach friends, neighbors, and co-workers. These DVDs are extremely inexpensive when purchased in bulk quantities. Click HERE for pricing. Please secure your copy and view these presentations. I am confident you will be sufficiently impressed that you will want to get copies in the hands of others.

As you are no doubt well aware, the U.S. government is in the process of sending checks to many Americans in order to stimulate the economy. It may be the case that you have already made mental plans as to how to distribute that money. Maybe you are thinking about purchasing new furniture, making a down-payment on a new car, or buying a flat-screen television. May I encourage you to consider donating a portion of those funds to the work at Apologetics Press? We have been busy producing scientifically sound, biblically accurate materials, and have several resources in the final stages of production that lack funding.

For instance, Digger Doug’s Underground episodes seven and eight are complete and waiting for funds. These two episodes deal with the false evolutionary concept of vestigial organs, as well as the argument for God’s existence based on the scientific Law of Cause and Effect. In addition, Eric Lyons and Kyle Butt have completed a ten-chapter, 200+ page adult book titled The Dinosaur Delusion that offers in-depth research verifying the co-existence of humans and dinosaurs. Furthermore, Kyle and Eric have also recently recorded a six-lesson DVD series titled Behold! The Lamb of God that covers such topics as the historicity and uniqueness of Christ, the resurrection, and Messianic prophecies. Also, the third in our series of rhyming books is finished and ready. It is titled A Man Who Loved Money and relates the story of the rich young ruler.

We are excited about the materials and resources that God has allowed us to produce and distribute in the past, and, with His blessing, we look forward to adding many more such resources in the future. With your help, we can spread the Gospel to the lost, defend the Faith, and equip the saints to be ready to give an answer for the hope that lies in them. Please consider joining with us in these noble goals by donating to the cause.

Copyright © 2008 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

*Please keep in mind that Discovery articles are written for 3rd-6th graders.

This document may be copied, on the condition that it will not be republished in print unless otherwise stated below, and will not be used for any commercial purpose, as long as the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) any references, footnotes, or endnotes that accompany the article must be included with any written reproduction of the article; (4) textual alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden; (5) Some illustrations (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, etc.) are not the intellectual property of Apologetics Press and as such cannot be reproduced from our site without consent from the person or organization that maintains those intellectual rights; (6) serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7) articles, excepting brief quotations, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited or altered from their original written content and that credit is given to Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles were taken. Further, documents may not be copied without source statements (title, author, journal title), and the address of the publisher and owner of rights, as listed below.

For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:

Apologetics Press
230 Landmark Drive
Montgomery, Alabama 36117
Phone (334) 272-8558

Web Store

Reasons to Believe

Whether you believe in God or not, the approach of Reasons to Believe should be refreshing to you. This book lists reasons to believe in God, the Bible, and Jesus. What is so profound about that approach? In truth, it is often the case that people...

Featured Audio

Click the following link to visit our Multimedia section.

Featured Audio

warcinfo:
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2019-04
publisher: Common Crawl
description: Wide crawl of the web for January 2019
operator: Common Crawl Admin (info@commoncrawl.org)
hostname: ip-10-145-104-113.ec2.internal
software: Apache Nutch 1.15 (modified, https://github.com/commoncrawl/nutch/)
robots: checked via crawler-commons 0.11-SNAPSHOT (https://github.com/crawler-commons/crawler-commons)
format: WARC File Format 1.1
conformsTo: http://iipc.github.io/warc-specifications/specifications/warc-format/warc-1.1/


WARC-Identified-Payload-Type: application/xhtml+xml

text:
Wednesday, June 15, 2016

It's a top

Since I will be out-of-town for day guild meeting next week, I will show my Pizza Box challenge top.

Here is a before photo of when I was working on the blocks.  Three more blocks were made to bring the total to 12 blocks and then the appliqued leaves came out to play.  Gosh, when I look at this photo, it sure is fuzzy.  I took it with my ipad and I'm not sure about the quality.
Ah, this photo is so much better!  Well, here it is .... this autumn top is done!  The quilting design has already been figured out and it will get quilted and ready for showing at the next day guild meeting in September.  I'm very happy with my blocks that were made by others.  When I asked that they use autumn colours, this is what I had in mind for the final look.  The leaves brought everything together. Yep, very happy indeed!
This is the fabric that I provided and was to be used in each block.  This fabric has been in my stash for years and was the inspiration for the layout of the blocks and the applique.  Perfect, I would say!  :o)
What else have I been up to?  A call from the LAer had me rushing over to pick up this quilt that she just completed.  Problem though ... I threw out my back and will have to wait a while before I can struggle with this quilt and the binding on my sewing machine.  It is a huge quilt (100" square) and the weight right now will be just too much to handle.
After picking up this quilt, DH and I stopped in to visit my brother and SIL.  We met their Aussie visitors that stayed with them for a week.  They are from Newcastle and  Lake Macquarie, NSW, Australia.  What a pleasure it was to meet them and have a wee chat.

I will again be linking up with  and join in with other Canadian quilters to show we have done this week.

Have a great day!

Jennifer said...

I love your Pizza Box challenge really says autumn in Ontario, doesn't it! And the backing fabric suits so well too. Wow, 100 inches square is a large quilt - I don't blame you for waiting until your back is right before binding it.

Laurel's Stitches said...

I agree with Jennifer, your pizza box artists produced some gorgeous blocks... and you put the quilt top together so nicely. Beautiful!

Thank you for posting to TN&TN's WIP Wednesday!

Pam @ Quilting Fun said...

Fabulous quilt top. The autumn colours are perfect. And I love the variety of blocks.

Debra Anger said...

Love your design for your sampler blocks great idea and it is excellent to be able to get the idea from your fabrics!!
I am so sorry about your back I hope it clears up soon I will have some binding for you when you come..LOL (hopefully I will have them all done by then)

Are you going to bring a quilt to put in the Quilts by the Creek show?


text:
Death of a Kingfisher (by M. C. Beaton)

Death of a Kingfisher (by M. C. Beaton)

iOS Universal Books

Own Wish Buy Buy

When Scotland is hit by recession, police constable Hamish Macbeth notices that the Highland people are forced to come up with inventive ways to lure tourists to their sleepy towns. The quaint village of Braikie doesn’t have much to offer, other than a place of rare beauty called Buchan’s Wood, which was bequeathed to the town. The savvy local tourist director renames the woods “The Fairy Glen,” and has brochures printed with a beautiful photograph of a kingfisher rising from a pond on the cover.

It isn’t long before coach tours begin to arrive. But just as the town’s luck starts to turn, a kingfisher is found hanging from a branch in the woods with a noose around its neck. As a wave of vandalism threatens to ruin Braikie forever, the town turns to Hamish Macbeth. And when violence strikes again, the lawman’s investigation quickly turns from animal cruelty to murder.

Download your book directly over Wi-Fi or cellular network and begin listening as soon as the first track downloads. The powered app features an attractive interface with traditional audio controls in addition to sleep timer, bookmarking, and variable track scrubbing.

App Features
• Attractive, easy-to-use interface
• Download audio tracks directly over Wi-Fi and cellular networks for offline listening
• Multitasking for background downloads and background audio controls
• Resume playback functionality
• Remember important parts of the book with bookmarks and notes
• Sleep timer: 5, 10, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90 minutes or when the current track ends
• Variable track scrubbing

Questions or comments? Visit or get in touch on Twitter @downpour_com

Show More...

My Rating

App Store Rating


text:
January 18, 2019, 05:13:17 AM
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Please support ARC by supporting our sponsors...
News: The 2015 calendar is up for world motorcycle races.
  Home Help   Search   Calendar Login Register
Set Search Parameters
Search for:
e.g. Orwell "Animal Farm" -movie

Advanced search
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.13 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!


text:
AQD attends symposium on current research trends in fisheries biology

AQD’s Binangonan Freshwater Station (BFS) senior staff Dr. Maria Rowena Eguia, Mr. Ruel Eguia, and Ms. Antonieta Evangelista participated in the international symposium on Current research trends in fisheries biology last January 20. The conference was held at the Philippine Carabao Center, CLSU (Central Luzon State University), Nueva Ecija.

The purpose of the conference is to disseminate results of the collaborative studies by CLSU and the National Taiwan University under the Microsatellite and Otolith (MO) project. Most topics of the presentations are on population genetics as applied in the conservation and management of freshwater fishes.

In joining this event, BFS participants were able to: (1) gather relevant concepts and techniques that can be applied to BFS’s current research projects, and (2) meet researchers who are interested in collaborating with AQD.

No comments:


text:
The AquaHawk Blog

A blog about customer portal solutions for utilities.

Case Study: Seacoast Utility Authority, FL

Service Connections: 36,000 | Households + Businesses Served: 51,560 | Meter Reading System: SensusAMI

CaseStudy Article SUA FrtHighlights

  • Identified potential water leaks and enabled SUA to easily alert customers
  • Reduced onsite service calls for high bill issues
  • Helped support staff answer customer inquiries more effectively
  • Offered customers more self-service capabilities.
Continue reading
  2627 Hits

Case Study: City of Wooster, OH

Service Connections: 9,600 | Population: 26,540 | Meter Reading System: Aclara AMI

CaseStudy Blog CityofWoosterHighlights

  • Improved the City's ability to identify leaks and rapidly notify customers
  • Reduced customer support calls
  • Delivers useful data for managing the water system
  • Gives customers more control over their water consumption.

Continue reading
  4731 Hits

Case Study: City of Redmond, OR

Service Connections: 10,000 | Population: 30,000 | Meter Reading System: Aclara AMI

CaseStudy Blog CityofRedmond frontpageHighlights

  • Implemented an automated past due notification program that reduced the number of customer shutoff visits by 30%
  • Launched a community outreach program to meet State-mandated water conservation requirements
  • Expanded the tools available to employees enabling them to perform day-to-day tasks more efficiently.

Continue reading
  8053 Hits

Case Study: Dublin San Ramon Services District, CA

Service Connections: 21,524 | Population: 78,000 | Meter Reading System: Sensus FlexNet™ AMI

CityofDublin outlineHighlights

  • Dramatically reduced daily potable water use and irrigation consumption during 2014 resulting in a lower State mandated water conservation standard (12%) than other neighboring districts for 2015. Easily meeting that standard
  • Reduced the number of accounts receiving excess usage penalties from 1009 to 65
  • Implemented a consumer engagement solution and enrolled more than 7,675 accounts--nearly 40% of their customer base.
Continue reading
  11554 Hits

Case Study: Oro Valley Water Utility, AZ

Service Connections: 19,000 | Population: 42,000 | Meter Reading System: Sensus FlexNet™ AMI

Oro Valley AZHighlights

•  Expand their online services
•  Enable customers to view their water usage and an estimate of their bill anytime during the billing cycle
•  Send proactive customer alerts when leaks or other issues are detected
•  Enable the water conservation team to perform their daily tasks more efficiently and drive better conservation results.

Continue reading
  33722 Hits

Case Study: Castle Pines Metropolitan District, CO

Service Connections : 1,682 | Population: 4,556 | Meter Reading System: Mobile AMR / Sensus FlexNet™ AMI

•  Prevented the loss of more than 5.5 million gallons of water (16.9 acre-feet)
•  Saved the District $225,000 in avoided water costs (purchase, treatment, and distribution expenses)
•  Identified a wide variety of leaks caused by: broken toilets, malfunctioning appliances, leaking irrigation lines, improperly
    programmed irrigation clocks, pipe breaks, and more
•  Enhanced the level of service to CPMD customers by proactively notifying them of problems and preventing costly property damage.

Continue reading
  13333 Hits


text:
Coco (2017)

May 27, 2018 @ 5:30 pm – 8:00 pm America/Los Angeles Timezone

Sunday, May 27th

Doors at 5:30 PM.

Movie at 6:00 PM.

105 min.

Rated PG

Despite his family’s baffling generations-old ban on music, Miguel dreams of becoming an accomplished musician like his idol, Ernesto de la Cruz. Desperate to prove his talent, Miguel finds himself in the stunning and colorful Land of the Dead following a mysterious chain of events. Along the way, he meets charming trickster Hector, and together, they set off on an extraordinary journey to unlock the real story behind Miguel’s family history.

Comments are closed.


text:
Prol Shop Prol TV Prol Radio Lalkar Red Youth Photos
Search Proletarian search

>>back to Proletarian index >>view printer-friendly version
Proletarian issue 52 (February 2013)
What’s going on in Sri Lanka?

Snippets of news have reached the British media about Sri Lanka impeaching and then dismissing its chief justice, Shirani Bandaranayake, on various charges of impropriety (having secret bank accounts and the like).

However, it is a fact that ever since the threat of impeachment began several weeks ago, Ms Bandaranayake’s fellow lawyers have been up in arms, going on strike and protesting at interference by the government in the judicial process. Had the Chief Justice really been caught out on the take, it is inconceivable that she would have generated such mass support among legal professionals. Naturally, therefore, one is curious as to what really lies behind these events.

It seems that the heart of the problem centres round a piece of proposed legislation that the Supreme Court, with the Chief Justice presiding, pronounced to be contrary to Sri Lanka’s constitution. The legislation in question was the Divi Neguma Bill.

On the face of it, the bill merely sought to rationalise administration of a fund designed to bring assistance to the rural poor. Instead of being under the purview of three different regional authorities, its administration was to be centralised under a government ministry. However, the ministry concerned is headed by one of the four brothers of President Mahinda Rajapaksa, all of whom have been given cushy and powerful posts in the Rajapaksa government.

Added to this is a general conviction that the Rajapaksa family is unashamedly kleptocratic, if, that is, a WikiLeaks revelation of October 2011 is to be believed:

In a leaked diplomatic cable released by whistleblower site WikiLeaks, US Ambassador in Colombo Patricia Butenis says 85 percent of Sri Lankans voted in an opinion poll saw Rajapaksa family as corrupt and 80 percent saw the president himself as corrupt.” (, 6 October 2011)

As one journalist’s website points out: “To understand the Divineguma Bill, ignore the rhetoric and study the budgetary figures. Ministry of Defence and Urban Development (under Mahinda and Gotabhaya Rajapaksa) will get the biggest financial chunk in 2013 as well. Currently, only Rs 88.9bn is allocated to Brother Basil’s Ministry of Economic Development. Once the Divineguma Bill is through, the new mega-Divineguma Department will be given Rs 80bn. This massive financial-injection will make Brother Basil’s fiefdom second only to Brother Gotabaya’s, in terms of budgetary allocations.” (‘Divineguma bill tells the Tamils that the regime is hell-bent on obliterating devolution’ by Tisaranee Gunasekara,, 6 Oct 2012)

Quite apart from suspicions of money being diverted from its intended purpose of helping the poor into at very least purchasing electoral support for the Rajapaksas, or even perhaps simply diverted into the pockets of the Rajapaksa family to satisfy their kleptomania, this centralisation of power militates heavily against Sri Lanka’s project of reconciliation between the Tamil and Sinhalese communities, a major cornerstone of which is to give Tamils more regional autonomy. Various provisions in the bill certainly give rise to suspicion: for example, all employees of the Fund are to be required to swear an oath of secrecy, and the fund is to be exempted from supervision by the central bank.

Moreover, it is also suspected that this move is but the thin end of the wedge:

If the Bill becomes law, it will open the anti-democratic floodgates. Other Rajapaksa-strengthening measures will follow, such as the bill to subordinate the CMC and several other councils to a mammoth ‘corporation’ under Gotabaya Rajapaksa; and the amendment to empower the regime to acquire any land by declaring it of religious/economic import.” (Ibid)

In the light of Rajapaksa’s track record, these fears would seem to be far from baseless:

His foes accuse Mahinda Rajapaksa of many sins during his seven years as Sri Lanka’s president ... They bridle at how he has carved up the government among his brothers, like a thriving family-run conglomerate. They resent the amendment of the constitution pushed through in 2010 to remove the limit on his tenure of two six-year terms, and to give himself legal immunity and the final say in appointments to the civil service, the judiciary and the police. And they suspect his regime of connivance in the beatings, disappearances and murders that have been used to intimidate critics in the press and elsewhere.” (‘Sri Lanka shuffles further down the path to dictatorship’ by Banyan, Economist, 19 January 2013)

It is hardly surprising, therefore, that even Sri Lanka’s rather subservient judiciary felt that this went a step too far and declared the bill to be unconstitutional.

Since Shirani was originally a Rajapaksa appointee and protégée, who, as an academic lacking any practical experience, could never have become chief justice without the president’s manoeuvring, not to say bulldozing, on her behalf, one can quite see that her ingratitude would enrage him.

Constitutionally, the legislature has the power to impeach the chief justice. That it did so is partly the fault of the Supreme Court itself. After the 2010 election, it ruled that an opposition party could not sack members who had crossed the floor of Parliament to join the government coalition. Since Sri Lanka has a system of proportional representation, this seemed perverse. But it gave the government the two-thirds parliamentary majority it needed to ram through its objectionable constitutional amendments – and to impeach the chief justice.” (Ibid)

Well, it seems that Shirani was herself very much instrumental in assisting Rajapaksa consolidate his power by means of this ‘perverse’ interpretation of the Sri Lankan constitution and now finds herself hoist by if not exactly her own petard, at least a petard that she was instrumental in assembling. But still, if, for whatever reason, she has come round to the side of democracy and justice, and/or has had her illusions shattered in the Rajapaksa cause, this is no time to bear a grudge.

It was perhaps disappointing that she accepted her dismissal and has not tried to assert her right to remain as chief justice, despite the strong support she has received from the legal profession. It would seem, however, that, despite a widespread understanding of Rajapaksa’s essential cupidity, many Sri Lankans believe that he is a good leader:

The president still basks in the popularity of a man who won the war and ended the fighting. Concerns about the way he did so are seen as squeamish foreign bleats. And the economy is forecast to grow by nearly 7 percent in each of the next five years. The lawyers who this week flew black flags and blew out symbolic candles will lack supporters in Sri Lanka’s villages.” (Ibid)

Herein lies one of the paradoxes of Rajapaksa’s situation. He inclines towards China rather than western imperialism, which both helps to explain his country’s relative economic success, despite the world recession, and why the imperialist media are all tut-tutting loudly at his unconstitutional behaviour!
>>back to Proletarian index >>view printer-friendly version


text:
Weather | Traffic

Activate Account | Manage Account | Logout | Today's Paper
Today's Paper, also known as the e-Edition, is an online replica of the printed newspaper. You can view today's paper or previous issues.
| Advertise

KPUD seeks input on broadband network

optical fibres dinamic flying from deep on technology background
optical fibres dinamic flying from deep on technology background
July 20, 2015

By Tad Sooter of the Kitsap Sun

July 20, 2015 0

POULSBO — Kitsap Public Utility District already operates a 200-mile-long fiber optic network connecting government offices, medical buildings and businesses across the county.

Now the district is looking for input on where it should extend high-capacity, broadband connections into residential neighborhoods and individual homes.

Kitsap PUD launched a website this month that allows residents to enter their addresses and register interest in broadband access. The website can be found here.

Paul Avis, telecommunications superintendent for Kitsap PUD, said several Kitsap neighborhoods have made inquiries about broadband Internet connections in recent years. The website will allow the district to more accurately gauge demand, he said.

“We want to make sure what we’re doing isn’t reacting to a few people in the county,” Avis said.

If enough homeowners in a specific area wanted broadband, the district would work with them to fund fiber connections. Avis said it’s possible local utility districts could be established to finance equipment and construction. Kitsap PUD has used local utility districts to acquire private water systems.

“For telecom, I think we can use the same process,” Avis said.

Kitsap PUD could extend broadband connections to homes, but residents still would need to purchase services like high-speed Internet from private providers. State law prohibits utility districts from selling broadband services directly to consumers. Instead, districts like Kitsap PUD act as wholesalers, selling broadband to retailers, which sell service to individual customers.

That’s another reason Kitsap PUD needs to measure demand for residential connections carefully. If the district extends its network to a neighborhood that doesn’t have enough customers interested in broadband, a private provider might not be willing to offer service, and the expensive fiber infrastructure could go unused.

“We have to be sure the interest is there,” Avis said.

Kitsap PUD and partners have installed more than 200 miles of fiber optic cable in Kitsap County since 2000. Fiber optic networks use glass filaments and lasers to transmit data between points.

For information, go here.

Tad Sooter thumbnail
About Tad Sooter

Tad Sooter covers business and health care for the Kitsap Sun, and writes the Minding Your Business blog. He is a 2007 graduate of the University of Montana School of Journalism.

0 Share Tweet Print

Local News by Community

Facebook Updates

The Washington State Patrol reports that there was a fatality a little after 5 p.m. today | November 14 at 7:09 pm See Post »

Fast ferry vote update after Monday's count: Yes 58,443 (51.3%), No 55,523 (48.7%). ... | November 14 at 6:49 pm See Post »

We're hearing that a Bremerton-Seattle ferry had to slow, or perhaps stop, this morning ... | November 14 at 9:35 am See Post »

Pedestrian struck by vehicle at Charleston Boulevard and Charleston Beach Road. | November 14 at 6:58 am See Post »


text:
 Vector, the Journal of the British APL Association

Current issue

Vol.26 No.4

Vol.26 No.4

© 1984-2019
British APL Association
All rights reserved.

Archive articles posted online on request: ask the archivist.

Volume 1, No.1

SCREENIO—A Full Screen Manager

by David Doherty.

For some time now, BUPA has been a major user of APL. The majority of the APL applications which we write for our internal users are highly interactive in nature and to ensure that this interaction is as “painless” as possible we take full advantage of the IBM fullscreen facilities available to us under AP124.

Until SCREENIO, the implementation of these full-screen systems relied solely upon a set of screen design and low-level screen handling software which had been developed within BUPA. This software is similar in nature to the IBM supplied screen software.

SCREENIO treats screens as self-contained entities and addresses such problems as dynamic screen output, complex validity checks, PF key handling and scrolling.

The simple parameter definitions which describe the SCREENIO screen ensure that they are simple to build, maintain and modify.

Before describing SCREENIO, let us first consider some other problems related to screens on their management. We shall also review the screen software we already had and examine how far it went towards solving those problems.

Designing a screen to run within any application system requires careful consideration and planning. It must be considered both from the aspect of the user and the application itself.

The Screen-User Interface

  • Physical layout:
    The physical layout of fields on the screen, i.e. their position, a shape, and logical order (I have not seen many screens where the “first” prompt appears at the bottom left-hand corner of the screen!). Physical layout is a vital aspect of screen design and can mean the difference between a screen being easy or difficult to use.

  • Field intensity:
    Skilful use of intensity can improve readability of the screen and highlight important screen details.

  • Static text:
    Fixed prompts and headings which guide the user in both the use and purpose of the screen, are vital and must be clear and concise.

  • Dynamic text:
    Anything from time and date displays to dynamic headings or error messages constitute dynamic text; these guide the user in his treatment of the screen.

  • PF keys:
    They are useful for all manner of things e.g. summoning help displays which describe the screen, signalling QUIT or SAVE, controlling vertical and horizontal scrolling, invoking special facilities peculiar to that screen or application.

The Screen-Application Interface

  • Referencing screen fields:
    Screen fields must be referenced in order to read or write to them.

  • Validation:
    Once the screen has been displayed, the user's entries are examined and validated.

  • Screen handling:
    After, for example, an invalid input, it is usual to reposition the cursor, display error flags or messages, sound the terminal alarm and so forth.

  • Capturing screen input:
    Finally, it is necessary to capture the users (validated) inputs to the screen.

Screen design software and low-level screen utilities were already in use ...

Screen-User Interface

  • Physical layout:
    Our screen design software allowed easy definition and modification of the positions, shape and type of all screen fields.

  • Field intensity:
    Field intensity could be set dynamically as well is that the design stage.

  • Static text:
    Defined during the design stage.

  • Dynamic text:
    Low-level software allowed us, under the control of application code, to write to the screen.

  • PF keys:
    The key depressed may be detected, but handling of the key has to be controlled by application code.

The Screen-Application Interface

  • Referencing screen fields:
    Field labels, which simplify field referencing, are defined during the design stage.

  • Validation:
    All validation must be handled by application code.

  • Screen handling:
    Screen control is effected through low-level software driven by application code.

  • Capturing screen imports:
    The capturing of screen inputs must be controlled by application code.

Clearly, the management of the screen requires a combination of calls to the low-level screen handling functions for communication with and manipulation of the screen, coupled with application code to actually govern the handling of the screen.

From careful consideration of the above, the advantages in treating screens as self-contained entities which could be handled by standard software were recognised, thereby:

  • Removing the repetitive aspects of the process, saving development time and eliminating redundant code.

  • Combining both the definition of the physical attributes of the screen with dynamic output, verification, error messages and PF key handling, so that the screen could be regarded as a single entity.

  • Providing a standard way of defining these “facets” of the screen so as to simplify its maintenance.

It would then be possible to drive screens via a standard screen manager which would only require the name of the screen to be used. The manager would then drive the screen, performing all validation, executing any dynamic outputs and handling the PF keys according to the parameter specifications made at the design stage.

One possible problem with this approach might be that the programmer would be constrained by such a package. Flexibility was therefore given a high priority.

With these aims in mind, SCREENIO evolved. Logically, it is divided into two groups -- maintenance and application. The maintenance routines (which are themselves SCREENIO screens!) are held on a central library and loaded as necessary.

Within the application system only the application group is needed to drive the screens and should be stored as part of the application.

Maintaining the Screens

SCREENIO screens are held on file and are referenced by name. Its screen maintenance routines utilise our existing screen design software: they do not supplant it.

The creation or amendment of a SCREENIO screen involves extra steps in the design stage these extra steps are integrated with existing screen design software.

SCREENIO's parameter definitions consider the screen both from the aspect of the user and the application.

The Screen-User Interface.

  • Physical layout: no change.

  • Field intensity: no change.

  • Static text: no change.

  • Dynamic text:
    Text may be written to any field on entry to the screen. An output parameter is simply defined for that field. Most dynamic headings, time, help and date displays are catered for.

  • PF Keys:
    They may be separately defined for each screen. Some PF keys are defined according to our own internal standards. These are:

    • PF1 summons a help display.
    • PF3 is QUIT.
    • PF12 is END.
    • PF9 displays the PFD descriptions.
    • PF keys 7, 8, 10 and 11 are reserved for vertical and horizontal scrolling of data.

    These keys, along with their standard descriptions, are automatically defined for each screen when it is created. Scrolling will only operate if the data exceeds the size of the field in either, or both of, the vertical and horizontal dimensions.

    The remaining keys, 2, 4, 5 and 6, may be defined by the programmer as special-purpose keys. Both the description and a definition may be entered. EXECUTABLE EXPRESSIONS are entered for the definitions and text for their descriptions.

The Screen-Application Interface

  • Reference screen fields: no change.

  • Validation:

    SCREENIO provides for the verification of screen input in two ways:

    Fields may be validated on an individual basis. For each input field, a number of parameters are defined during the design stage and they control the validation for that field.

    For each field, an (EXECUTABLE) VALIDATION EXPRESSION is entered, which is used to validate the contents of the field. SCREENIO contains some “inbuilt” validation routines for the more common validation requirements, like numeric validation, table lookups etc. They are invoked using special characters within the expression.

    If the input into the field is INVALID, SCREENIO will write an ERROR MESSAGE which the programmer has defined, to a nominated ERROR field. The ERROR MESSAGE may be static, or dynamically defined.

    The input fields can be flagged as MANDATORY or OPTIONAL which means that the programmer can force the user to input details where necessary or omit them where defaults have been predefined.

    Similarly SCREENIO can be directed to CLEAR INVALID entries from input fields or leave the entry for the user to edit. Finally, SCREENIO will assign the contents of the field to a (GLOBAL) variable which the programmer nominates.

    It is frequently necessary to consider fields in relation to one another: for example, it may be necessary to multiply two fields together to form a new result, which may in turn have to be validated.

    SCREENIO provides for this through the entry of “rules” which apply to the input fields. Each “rule” may apply to as many, or as few fields as required. Like the individual field validation, the programmer defines several parameters.

    An EXECUTABLE VALIDATION EXPRESSION is used to examine input fields in relation to one another.

    If the result is VALID, an (optional) result may be written to a designated field. If the result is INVALID, an ERROR MESSAGE which again may be static or dynamic is written to an ERROR FIELD.

  • Screen handling:
    SCREENIO handles the screen in a consistent and logical manner following the use of PF keys, error messages etc.

  • Capturing screen inputs:
    SCREENIO assigns (as described above) all the users' inputs into (GLOBAL) variables.

Driving the screen

To run a SCREENIO screen it is only necessary to call SCREENIO with the name of the required screen passed to it as an argument.

It utilises the low-level screen handling software, governing it according to the operation being performed. We may summarise the execution of SCREENIO as follows.

  1. Reads the file-held variables for the required screen into the workspace.

  2. Formats the screen and writes both STATIC and DYNAMIC text.

  3. Displays the screen and awaits user input.

  4. Action keys depressed.

  5. Validates input and assigns it to (GLOBAL) variables.

  6. The screen is finally left. The key depressed is returned as an explicit result. The application code can act upon the key returned and utilise the GLOBAL variables SCREENIO has defined.

The effort put into SCREENIO has proved worthwhile. It has shown itself to be a valuable tool which meets its design criteria.

By treating screens as single entities it provides us with a coherent approach to the use of screens within applications and the problems encountered in their design use.

It is easy to use, requiring only a single call to SCREENIO within application code.

It is eminently flexible, controlling dynamic output to the screen, PF key handling, validation of fields both individually and in relation to each other, and finally, returning all input from the screen in a convenient collection of variables.

Above all, SCREENIO does not constrain the programmer because it allows EXECUTABLE EXPRESSIONS within the parameter definitions.

We are not, however, complacent. SCREENIO evolved into its present state and is continuing to evolve as the problems associated with screens and their management are reconsidered, new problems encountered or new approaches sought.

(webpage generated: 12 December 2009, 09:55)

script began 9:46:10
caching off
debug mode off
cache time 3600 sec
indmtime not found in cache
cached index is fresh
recompiling index.xml
index compiled in 0.3126 secs
read index
read issues/index.xml
identified 26 volumes, 101 issues
array (
  'id' => '10002840',
regenerated static HTML
article source is 'HTML'
source file encoding is 'ASCII'
read as 'Windows-1252'
completed in 0.3424 secs


text:
 Vector, the Journal of the British APL Association

Current issue

Vol.26 No.4

Vol.26 No.4

© 1984-2019
British APL Association
All rights reserved.

Archive articles posted online on request: ask the archivist.

Volume 25, No.3

  • online
  • 1.0

What is it about infinity?

by Sylvia Camacho (sylviac@blueyonder.co.uk)

Sylvia Camacho's answer to Thomson's letter on Infinity.

Dear Norman,

I read Cornelius Lanczos on classes of the number field some years before I was introduced to APL, so I was immediately receptive to Iverson's emphasis on improving the rigour of mathematical notation by distinguishing between the subtraction operator and the notation for a negative number. This made me hyper-sensitive to the ambiguity of the conventional expression for the infinite alternative of reciprocals. Your comment on the definition of 'convergent series' shows that the reciprocal series cannot converge as a simple sum but it does if every alternate value is subtracted. This, in conventional maths implies an order of evaluation:

   (((((((9-8)+7)-6)+5)-4)+3)-2) NB.conv.maths evaluates lft to rt

and is insensitive to a change of sequence providing each term is assumed to include its preceding operator and that no term is omitted, which was how I read Derbyshire's "but only if you add up the terms in this order.":

   (((((((9+7)-8)-6)+5)-4)+3)-2) NB.conv.maths: lft to rt

but, of course, an infinite series implies an infinite procedure and so any actual evaluation will be an approximation equivalent to a truncated series which will be sensitive to omissions. Graham, being a mathematician, appreciated this: hence his final table. Your reference to the need to balance the p and n of any re-arrangement is a way of expressing the same restriction.

If like Iverson we follow Lanczos and use notation which distinguishes the class of positive from that of negative numbers, the conventional expression contains only positive numbers and preceding addition and subtraction operators and will be sensitive to bracketing which can split an operator from the following number. Lanczos explains that the subtraction operator came to be accepted as the indicator of a negative number by giving it an implied left argument of zero. This is also the way that J interprets it:

   -3 NB. enter minus 3
_3    NB. J returns negative 3

Do you think that conventional mathematicians believe that making this distinction between operator and negative sign is to make a mountain out of a molehill? I have to accept that Lanczos did not use any special notation in his regular mathematical publications.

Your explanation of Riemann's Theorem is intuitively clear, although I could not begin to prove it. The infinity of reciprocals of integers comprises all possible fractions of the unit, from which any number could be composed just as any number can be represented in base-2 (I think).

Regards from sylviac@blueyonder.co.uk

script began 9:14:53
caching off
debug mode off
cache time 3600 sec
indmtime not found in cache
cached index is fresh
recompiling index.xml
index compiled in 0.2936 secs
read index
read issues/index.xml
identified 26 volumes, 101 issues
array (
  'id' => '10500810',
regenerated static HTML
article source is 'XHTML'
completed in 0.3214 secs


text:
News for Jun. 17, 2003

Star-studded auction in aid of SPCA

6/17/03, 12:03 pm EST - Xoanon

The film production Troy has continued its support of the SPCA, with memorabilia from the movie fetching about Lm4,500 at a fund-raising reception hosted at the US ambassador's residence on Sunday. A host of Troy actors - Orlando Bloom (Legolas), Sean Bean (Boromir), Brian Cox (25th Hour), John Shrapnel (Gladiator), Diane Kruger, who is playing Helen of Troy and Garrett Hedlund as Patroclus - attended the event, mingling with the guests and using their celebrity status in aid of Malta's many stray animals. [More]


text:
Covering a wide range of professions and manufacturing techniques involved in the art and science of watchmaking, Hublot employs different methods of this centuries-old craft to accommodate the latest in materials and fabrication techniques as well as the most traditional forms of handwork, all under one roof. It is this flexibility in manufacturing that allows Hublot to remain at the helm of innovation in watchmaking and produce unique and cutting-edge timepieces.

Where to purchase


text:
America’s Entrepreneurs

Successful Entrepreneurship is not limited to 20-something techies riding a wave of venture capital. Online magazine Next Avenue has a series on entrepreneurship for those over 50. There are some good articles here. Read and learn!

Next Avenue covers America’s Entrepreneurs, showcasing the know-how and spirit of people over 50 who have started their own businesses or hope to do so.

Visit this series of articles on building a business when you’re 50+.

Leave a Comment

Time limit is exhausted. Please reload CAPTCHA.

Skip to toolbar


text:
Mick Tully Seminar – 6th Feburary

On Saturday the 6th February my friend and teacher Mick Tully has accepted to teach a seminar in Birmingham. I have trained with Mick now for 4 years and can say when he brings his unique take on the martial arts (with a bit of comedy too) it will be a seminar enjoyed by everyone. Regardless of martial arts background you’re sure to find something here of great interest.

  • Apprentice Instructor under Dan Inosanto
  • Instructor under Terry Barnett (Integrated Arts)
  • Associate Instructor under Michael Wright (AMC)
  • Associate Instructor under Rick Faye (MKG)
  • 1st Dan Wado Ryu Karate BASKKA
  • 2nd Dan Deutsche WadoKai verein
  • Instructor Phraya Pichai Muay Thai
  • USP Instructor under Bob Spour
  • NLP practitioner

Seminar cost is £30 per person, please contact me to book your place and payment can be made either through paypal or by cheque, contact me for paypal / address details. Any queries please drop me a message.

Look forward to seeing everyone soon.

Date: Saturday, 6 February 2016at 11:00–15:00
Location: Three Trees Centre, Hedingham Grove, Birmingham, B37 7TP

Show Map


text:
Category: Robots

Page 1 of 15 1 2 3 4 15

Marcelo Knörich Zuffo of the University of San Paolo in Brazil at Linaro Connect Vancouver 2018

Posted by juliusaugustus – November 21, 2018

Marcelo Knörich Zuffo is a professor of the Electronic Systems Engineering Department of the Polytechnic School of the University of San Paolo in Brazil. He teaches people how to design electronics and has projects going on such as drones using development boards such as the 96Boards platform. He also teaches PCB design. His particular specialty is autonomous drones that don't require human control. He uses boards from 96boards.

$179 Pixhawk 4, $300 Pixhack v5 Autopilot Open Source Development kit for Drones and Robots

Posted by Charbax – October 20, 2018

Pixhawk 4 is an advanced autopilot designed and made in collaboration with Holybro and the PX4 team. It is optimized to run PX4 version 1.7, suitable for academic and commercial developers.
Main FMU Processor: STM32F76532 Bit Arm Cortex-M7, 216MHz, 2MB memory, 512KB RAMIO Processor: STM32F10032 Bit Arm Cortex-M3, 24MHz, 8KB SRAM.Magnetometer: IST8310.GPS: ublox Neo-M8N GPS/GLONASS receiver; integrated magnetometer. Pixhack v5 is an advanced autopilot designed and made by CUAV®. The board is based on the Pixhawk-project FMUv5 open hardware design. It runs PX4 on the NuttX OS, and is fully compatible with PX4 firmware. It is intended primarily for academic and commercial developers. Main FMU Processor: STM32F76532 Bit Arm® Cortex®-M7, 216MHz, 2MB memory, 512KB RAM .IO Processor: STM32F100.32 Bit Arm® Cortex-M3, 24MHz, 8KB SRAM.Magnetometer: IST8310.Barometer: MS5611.Interfaces:8-14 PWM outputs (6 from IO, 8 from FMU) Aliexpress (text by flatslap5657 of Fiverr)

Get early access to all videos (weeks/months before everyone else), get business cards to companies filmed, support my video-blogging work, become a member at

$170 ROBOBLOQ Programmable Metal Robot Qoopers Kit, $90 Q-Scout and Q-Elephant

Posted by Charbax – October 20, 2018

JERRY WANG, CEO talking about products of Robobloq. Which is a new high tech player in STEM* education solution development. Robobloq robot construction platforms are mechanics, electronics and software & application. Robobloq two years old company but this already sales in Australia, New-Zeeland, France, Ukraine, Russia, Canada and United State. Products: Robobloq Qoopers Programmable Metal Robot Kit: Metal body, transformable and drag-and-drop programming: connect with robobloq app and enjoy playing with sensors and electronic modules in a fun way! remote control, line tracking, obstacle avoiding, music playing and rgb lights. drag and drop, and code, explore the metal building platform, cross-subject learning for future talents Robobloq Q-scout Take you beyond imagination: Metal blocks for a smiling robot:the use of aluminum delivers a true feel of robot; big eyes and a smile brings you close to the robotic world.Connect with Robobloq app and enjoy playing with sensors and electronic modules in a fun way! Drag-and-drop, code easily, cross-subject education solution: Robobloq q-scout is a hardware platform designed for stem* education. The future world needs a multi-skilled you. Robobloq Q-Elephant and Q-Dino : With 260+ pieces of metal parts and electronic modules you can build a majestic elephant which seems it travelled through time. The 8-legged structure added to the fun of building and playing! One little surprise - it can transform to a unicorn form with flapping wings. Q-dino strikes you as one of the cutest robot dinosaurs with its wiggling arms and biting jaw. An embedded DC motor driver brings extra fun to coding with it. Q-dino has an crocodile iteration with long tail, enjoy building. (text by flatslap5657 of Fiverr)

Get early access to all videos (weeks/months before everyone else), get business cards to companies filmed, support my video-blogging work, become a member at

$50 eduMIP with 96Boards, BeagleBone, Raspberry Pi, with Thomas Bewley (UCSD Professor)

Posted by Charbax – September 20, 2018

UC San Diego Professor Thomas Bewley discusses his Segway-like educational robotics kit, eduMIP, based on the BeagleBone Blue at Linaro Connect Vancouver 2018. This inexpensive kit (available online, for $128, at Renaissance Robotics is used in his Embedded Control & Robotics course at UCSD, which Prof Bewley is currently working on taking online as a MOOC. It is also beginning to be used by a community of researchers and educators at other universities around the world. In this video, Prof Bewley also introduces his early efforts in developing new (and, significantly higher-power) motor-control daughterboards in the 96boards and Raspberry Pi formats. He also discusses eduMIP v.2 and some other advanced prototypes in his lab, as well as the Robot Control (RC) software library that drives this hardware, and will ultimately enable easy porting of control codes across the BeagleBone, Raspberry Pi, and 96boards linux-based product lines, in addition to deployment onto very-low-cost custom targets based on Cortex M based processors running an RTOS. His ultimate goal with this ambitious effort is to facilitate a much more seamless pathway from lab prototype to commercial product.

Nvidia Press Conference at Computex 2018

Posted by Charbax – June 6, 2018

Jensen Huang, Founder and CEO of Nvidia, Announces Jetson Xavier which I have filmed a separate interview about here, he does not launch the rumored GTX2080 or GTX1180 next-gen graphics cards yet, provides update on Max-Q thinner full GPU gaming laptops, talks DGX-2 supercomputer "The World's Largest GPU" (an update on the DGX which I filmed here) with 2 petaflops of performance in one node, 512GB frame buffer which has set 5 world records: fastest single chip, fastest single node, fastest at scale, fastest inference, and highest inference throughput.

Libre Computer Development Boards S905X, RK3328, H2+/H3/H5 form-factor compatible with Raspberry Pi

Posted by Charbax – June 5, 2018

Libre Computer introduces three products of their CC-series which are form-factor compatible with the Raspberry Pi boards and based on open-market hardware. Depending on the model, these single-board computers (SBCs) offer higher performance, more RAM, and/or more IO while sharing the existing aftermarket parts ecosystem. All three products were featured on crowdfunding and supported by free and open source software (FOSS) like Linux and u-boot.

AML-S905X-CC, nicknamed Le Potato, is based on the popular Amlogic S905X SoC. It offers up to 2GB of RAM, four 64-bit cores, 4K60 video playback with HDR, and built-in infrared receiver. This board is the most power-efficient platform of the three and uses less than one watt at idle. There is a large suite of available software for the S905X SoC and it is the only one that has previously passed certification for Google’s Android TV platform. Currently, video decode is missing from upstream Linux and is only available from Amlogic’s BSP with Linux 4.9. Android up to 8 Oreo is available with design contract.

ROC-RK3328-CC, nicknamed Renegade, is based on the Rockchip RK3328 SoC. It offers up to 4GB of high-speed DDR4, four 64-bit cores, 4K60 video playback with HDR, USB 3.0, Gigabit Ethernet. Perfect for IO intensive application like home media center, NAS, microservice virtualization, and more. HDMI support in upstream Linux is scheduled to be completed in Q4 2018. Ubuntu and Debian with accelerated video and 3D is available based on Rockchip’s BSP with Linux 4.4. Android up to 8 Oreo is schedule to be available in Q3 2018 with design contract.

ALL-H3-CC, nicknamed Tritium, is based on three separate Allwinner SoCs: H2+, H3, and H5. The H2+ variant offers 512MB of RAM, four 32-bit cores, and 1080P video playback. The H3 variant is the H2+ variant with 1GB of RAM and 4K30 video playback. The H5 variant offers 2GB of RAM, four 64-bit cores, and 4K30 video playback. There is a large software community behind Allwinner SoCs called linux-sunxi and they have been upstreaming Linux hardware support for almost a decade. This platform also has a crowdfunded effort for video decode Linux upstream underway by Bootlin. Android up to 7 Nougat is available.

Full Comparison of Board Features

Libre Computer platforms are radio-less, FCC and CE certified, long-term-supported (LTS 5Y+) single-board computers. Libre Computer offers hardware customization on all supported SoC platforms. Standard boards with components added/removed can be ordered with 1K MOQ. Small effort customization/mezzanine design contract can be requested with 5K MOQ. Full custom design contracts are available for orders with 20K MOQ. Industrial design, software, project management resources are available as part of design contract.

$1299 Nvidia Jetson Xavier dev kit, 8-core ARMv8, 512-core Volta GPU for AI Robotics

Posted by Charbax – June 4, 2018

Nvidia launes Jetson Xavier with 20x the performance of Jetson TX2 and 10x the energy efficiency with 512-core Volta GPU with Tensor Cores in an embedded module with more than 9 billion transistors it runs at under 30W, with multiple operating modes at 10W, 15W, and 30W. The Jetson Xavier ARM SoC has 6 kinds of high-performance processors on its SoC, a Volta Tensor Core GPU, an eight-core ARM64 CPU, dual NVDLA deep learning accelerators, an image processor, a vision processor and a video processor. Jetson Xavier has a peak performance of up to 30 TOPS (trillion operations per second) of mixed-precision FP32/FP16/INT8 performance. It can encode dual 4K60 H265 and decode dual 4K60 H265 at up to 12bit. Comes with 16GB LPDDR4x RAM with 137GB/s memory bandwidth, 32GB eMMC storage. It also has a dual NVDLA DL/ML Accelerator Engines which are open source available at and a 7-way VLIW Vision Accelerator. Nvidia Jetson Xavier runs using the Nvidia Isaac platform, a toolbox for the simulation, training, verification and deployment of Jetson Xavier. This robotics software consists of: Isaac SDK, APIs and tools to develop robotics algorithm software and runtime framework with fully accelerated libraries, Isaac IMX (Intelligent Machine Acceleration) applications, a collection of NVIDIA-developed robotics algorithm software, Isaac Sim, a highly realistic virtual simulation environment for developers to train autonomous machines and perform hardware-in-the-loop testing with Jetson Xavier. The Nvidia Jetson Xavier developer kit, which includes the Isaac robotics software, will be priced at $1,299, with early access starting in August from distributors worldwide.

BOE Flexible Phone, 8K, 5644PPI micro-display (17x Retina), Printed OLED, QLED and more

Posted by Charbax – June 2, 2018

BOE presents their latest flexible AMOLED display solutions for the future of smartphones that can be bent, folded, and rolled and even flap in the wind. BOE's flexible displays is demonstrated for robots with touch control, smart loudspeakers, an S-shaped in-car flexible AMOLED display. 8K displays, micro displays, QLED displays and other IoT solutions such as their TFT based AMOLED fingerprint recognition system that works in any spot of the display area

The foldable all-screen WQHD AMOLED display launched by BOE can achieve minimum dynamic bending with a radius of only 1mm. It can be bent more than 100,000 times and has an NTSC color gamut up to 118%. BOE is exhibiting a 5.99" FHD+ 2160x1080 Flexible AMOLED foldable mobile phone and a 7.56" foldable tablet. The display can be used for mobile phones when it is folded up and for tablets or monitors when it unfolds.

As one of the upcoming possibly revolutionizing OLED technical directions, BOE demonstrates their OLED printing technology to possibly just print the future of Smartphone displays showing their 5.5" FHD (1920×1080) printing flexible OLED display.

UHD has become a keyword of SID 2018 for material and equipment suppliers and device manufacturers, signaling the advent of the 8K era. In addition to the 110-inch 8K, 75-inch 8K, and 65-inch 8K glasses-free 3D displays, BOE also presents 13.3-inch 8K display products, promoting the development of small and medium-sized 8K products.

BOE has gathered speed in building an 8K ecosystem ever since it launched the "8425 strategy" which means "promoting 8K, popularizing 4K, replacing 2K and making good use of 5G". BOE has recently launched the 8K solution that incorporates BOE's 4K/8K image service cloud, 8K decoder player, and 8K display device, making it possible to shoot, edit, transmit and broadcast 8K content. This helps to solve problems like the costliness and massive size of traditional decoder players, as well as the lack of 8K content, thus promoting the faster popularization of 8K.

Among several micro displays at BOE's booth is a silicon-based OLED AR product which features monocrystalline silicon as the active drive backplane as well as high resolution, high level of integration, low power consumption, small size, and light weight. The AR product is backed by a 0.39-inch silicon-based OLED which has the world's leading pixel density of 5644PPI, 17 times that of a Retina display, and a contrast ratio over 10000:1, which enables the overlapping and interaction between virtual 3D images and real scenes. All these secure an ultimate experience for users as well as bright prospect in the field of education and training, video games, home decoration, etc.

Moreover, BOE shows its cutting-edge technologies and products such as QLED, mini-LED displays, a number of new applications and products including curved in-car display instruments and BOE iGallery.

Actions S900 in Cubiedboard9 dev board, ATB1103/ATB1109 ARM Cortex-M0

Posted by Charbax – April 20, 2018

Actions S900 is a Quad-core ARM Cortex-A53, the Actions S500 is a Quad-core Cortex-A9. Actions also shows some other products for video smart speaker, smart door bell, smart kids robots, Actions also provides their MIPS based chipset for Bluetooth speakers, here also they are launching their new ATB1103/ATB1109 ARM Cortex-M0 system for their upcoming Bluetooth and perhaps also low cost smart speakers platform.

Allwinner R18, R16, R6 for Amazon Alexa and other smart speaker systems, B288 for E Ink e-reader

Posted by Charbax – April 19, 2018

Allwinner Smart Home solutions including their chipsets and development kit for the R18 which I also filmed here the $26 (169rmb) Allwinner R16 powered Xiao' ai Classmate Smart Speaker Mini by Xiaomi to be delivered in over 5 million units quantity, smart speakers by DIngDong. The Allwinner R6 enables even lower priced smart speakers with a maximum of 2 microphone in the microphone array for devices that will be closer to the user. The Allwinner B288 enables E Ink e-reader supported by DongDong which is China's leading online book store. The Allwinner MR100 powers the fully open source drone project by Kudrone. The Xiaomi Drone uses the Allwinner R16 too. The Allwinner FC1600 powers the Niutingting Early Learning Machine by Benew which reads stories for kids for 2-6 years old. Allwinner T3 for car dashboard and smart mirror, T8 for in-car entertainment. The Xiaomi Robot Vaccum Cleaner uses the Allwinner R16 and uses lasers to calculate distance to walls and navigate to vaccum and mop the floor.


text:
Elementary Band Conductor

Siobhan began her music career at the age of  7 playing the recorder in the Artane School of Music. She soon moved on to play the clarinet and saxophone under the instruction of David Birmingham, Ciaran Sutton and Andrew Gillespie. Siobhan also completed Music Theory studies under Tony Doherty.

Siobhan has been a member of the Ardee Concert Band and Cross-Border Orchestra.She is currently a member of the Dublin Concert Band.
As a member of various music groups, Siobhan has performed all around Ireland and Europe, in venues including the Royal Albert Hall and the National Concert Hall.

Following the Leaving Certificate, Siobhan attended the Mater Dei Institute of Education and completed modules in music history, composition, form analysis and music technology under the musical guidance of Dr.Roisin Blunnie, Mr.Donal Hurley, and Dr.Sean Doherty. Siobhan achieved an honors degree in Music and Religious Education. Siobhan is a qualified secondary school Music and Religion teacher and she is currently completing her master’s degree in Education in DCU.

Siobhan teaches our elementary band, a programme that welcomes young musicians to explore music and take the first step of their journey into the Artane School of Music. She also teaches classes in Music Theory.


text:
Henrietta Rae Paintings

Shop famous Henrietta Rae paintings and frames at discount price. We ship worldwide and accept custom art reproduction in any size, any image.
oil paintings home > shop by artist > Henrietta Rae Paintings
One of Henrietta Rae Famous Paintings

Henrietta Rae Paintings for sale - Handmade Canvas Reproductions

8.5 out of 10 based on 40 ratings.
    ©2019 ArtExpress.ws All Right reserved.
Framed Paintings for sale


text:
The Jeanneke Pis : Modern Art in Brussels

The Jeanneke Pis Fountain is situated in Brussels, Belgium. The fountain depicts a woman baby, in pigtails, squatting while relieving herself. She's sitting back on her toes and appears to generally be experiencing the moment. The Jeanneke Pis Fountain, like Manneken Pis, precisely displays an universal human knowledge - by no means failing to entertain and create a smile for its website visitors. It had been designed in 1985 by Denis Adrien Debouvire which is a great deal more fashionable than her brother fountain, Manneken Pis. Jeanneke is usually a companion statue into the Manneken Pis Fountain, and that is a nationwide landmark of Belgium. The very first Manneken Pis Fountain was built-in 1142, and there are many versions considering the fact that.

The Jeanneke Pis Fountain is incredibly little. It stands just around a meter and also a half tall which is nestled on the rear of the useless stop Avenue within the Rue des Bouchers space of Brussels. Butcher's street, or de Bouchers, is most popular for The variability of European beers and wines that can be tasted, liked, and water fountain purchased. In complete, there are actually about 2000 of varieties beer, wine, and vintage alcohols served close to the fountain.

It's unfamiliar why Debouvire established the Jeanneke Pis Fountain. When he was questioned, he replied “outside of loyalty”, and refused to remark further more. Debouvire's refusal produced An immediate legend out of the Jeanneke Pis and a must see for locals and guests alike. Quite a few speculate the Jeanneke Pis Fountain was made to attract far more travellers to your Butcher Road location, and it did perform. Nevertheless Other folks assert, by using a smirk, that Jeanneke is a product of and pays homage to the Women of all ages's liberation movement. These days, Butcher Avenue along with the Jeanneke Pis Fountain are among Brussel's most frequented locations 2nd only towards the Manneken Pis.

Even after 20 years, the Jeanneke Pis Fountain hasn't but been embraced by the town of Brussels. The Belgium authorities deliberately leaves it outside of its official tour tutorial. Regardless of what influenced the generation of Jeanneke, the fountain is one of A form and has but to generally be reproduced any in which else in the world. Even so, you'll find her photo on postcards and many souvenir items sold through the entire city. The Jeanneke Pis Fountain can be a testament to Brussels' laid again European Mind-set which welcomes guests from all over the environment with open up arms and also a helpful smile.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *