Grand Kru County Senator, Ablert Tugbeh Chie, has lauded citizens hailing from the county for electing him as senator in the just ended 2014 Special Senatorial Election.According to him, he will be ungrateful if he doesn’t thank the people of his county and other friends who supported him during the election process.Addressing hundreds of Grand Kru residents over the weekend in Monrovia, especially those from Forpoh District that are residing in Doe Community on the Bushrod Island, Senator Chie said the people of Forpoh have made wise decision by voting him in House of Senate.He said: “I have come to commend all of you for the significant roles you played in my life as well as our beloved county, and therefore, I can assure you all that this county will be developed through our collective efforts.”Senator Chie reminded his compatriots that with unity and coordination, they will promote development agenda and seek the interest of others at all times.“Let me make it clear to you that some projects which I have started in the county, I will make sure to complete them, because I want my people to trust me,” he promised.In a remark, the Chairman of Forpoh Community in Monrovia, Jeremiah Nimely, applauded Senator Chie for having the people of Forpoh at heart.Mr.Nimely disclosed that the citizens from Forpoh will wholeheartedly work with Senator Chie.The Forpoh Chairman then appealed to Sen. Chie to lobby with GSM companies operating in the country to carry communication networks to the district and the Dorbor District to enable them gets access to phone call.Senator Chie toured four communities in Monrovia and its environs thanking the people of Grand Kru and gave each community L$40,000 as a token of appreciation.Share this:Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
Shahjahan KhanA cabinet member on Saturday said ruling Awami League must wrest election victory from the BNP-Jamaat alliance next time.”We’ve to swear allegiance anew to snatch victory in the next elections, defeating the BNP-Jamaat alliance,” shipping minister Shahjahan Khan said at a programme in observance of Victory Day in his hometown of Madaripur.Shahjahan Khan, executive president of the Bangladesh Road Transport Workers Federation. said prime minister Sheikh Hasina-led government would return to power once again.”We’ve to be united and work towards that end. The Awami League will not lose to those who support war criminals and militancy,” he insisted.”Rather, the Awami League will break into gleeful celebration winning the next general elections.”The minister made the observations at the AL office in Madaripur after placing werath at the portrait of Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujibur Rahman.Member of parliament from Madaripur-3 AFM Bahauddin Nasim, district council chairman Miazuddin Khan, district AL president Shahabuddin Mollah and mayor of local pourasava Khalid Hossain were present.
Share Listen Listen 00:00 /00:59 Photo via Pixabay X To embed this piece of audio in your site, please use this code: 00:00 /07:55 To embed this piece of audio in your site, please use this code: Texas also saw a slight increase in the number of undocumented workers, though their overall share of the workforce was down.“Texas is also attracting U.S.-born workers and legal immigrant workers and those numbers are growing more rapidly,” according to Cohn. She said economic opportunity is likely what’s driving immigrants and others to come to the state.Using the interactive graph below, you can see undocumented population trends in Texas, the United States and other states, since 1990.The study comes as the Trump administration railed against Central American arrivals at the U.S. border and threatened to close it down. ….All will stay in Mexico. If for any reason it becomes necessary, we will CLOSE our Southern Border. There is no way that the United States will, after decades of abuse, put up with this costly and dangerous situation anymore!— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 24, 2018Pew data also shows the median length of time an undocumented immigrant has lived in the U.S. is 15 years. X A new Pew Research Center study shows the undocumented population nationwide has dropped to its lowest number in a decade, down to 10.7 million people in 2016. The decline is partly due to a sharp decrease in the number of unauthorized Mexican immigrants arriving to the United States.However, the nationwide trend does not extend to the border state of Texas, though California, Arizona and New Mexico did see a decline in the unauthorized population since 2007.“Nationally, we’re seeing a decline in the number of unauthorized immigrants but in Texas the number was stable,” Pew researcher D’Vera Cohn told Houston Matters in an interview. The undocumented population in Texas was 1.55 million people in 2007 and 1.6 million people in 2016, creeping up 3% over those ten years. By contrast, in the 12 years prior to 2007, Texas’ unauthorized population doubled.
New evidence for a preferred direction in spacetime challenges the cosmological principle (PhysOrg.com) — The 2011 Nobel Prize in physics, awarded just a few weeks ago, went to research on the light from Type 1a supernovae, which shows that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. The well-known problem resulting from these observations is that this expansion seems to be occurring even faster than all known forms of energy could allow. While there is no shortage of proposed explanations – from dark energy to modified theories of gravity – it’s less common that someone questions the interpretation of the supernovae data itself. Citation: A second look at supernovae light: Universe’s expansion may be understood without dark energy (2011, October 24) retrieved 18 August 2019 from https://phys.org/news/2011-10-supernovae-universe-expansion-understood-dark.html Mathematically, the principle of least action has two different forms. Physicists almost always use the form that involves the so-called Lagrangian integrand, but Annila explains that this form can only determine paths within stationary surroundings. Since the expanding universe is an evolving system, he suggests that the original but less popular form, which was produced by the French mathematician Maupertuis, can more accurately determine the path of light from the distant supernovae.Using Maupertuis’ form of the principle of least action, Annila has calculated that the brightness of light from Type 1a supernovae after traveling many millions of light-years to Earth agrees well with observations of the known amount of energy in the universe, and doesn’t require dark energy or any other additional driving force. Copyright 2011 PhysOrg.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed in whole or part without the express written permission of PhysOrg.com. This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only. “It is natural for us humans to yearn for predictions since anticipations contribute to our survival,” he said. “However, natural processes, as Maupertuis correctly formulated them, are intrinsically non-computable. Therefore, there is no real reason, but it has been only our desire to make precise predictions which has led us to shun the Maupertuis’ form, even though the least-time imperative is an accurate account of path-dependent processes. The unifying principle serves to rationalize various fine-tuning problems such as the large-scale homogeneity and flatness of the universe.”Light’s least-time pathHow exactly does the light travel on its least-time path? While the light is traveling, the expanding universe is decreasing in density. When light crosses from a higher energy density region to a lower energy density region, Maupertuis’ principle of least action says that the light will adapt by decreasing its momentum. Therefore, due to the conservation of quanta, the photon’s wavelength will increase and its frequency will decrease. Thus, the radiant intensity of light will decrease on its way from the supernova explosion during the high-density distant past to its present-day low-density universal surroundings. Also when light passes by a local energy-dense area, such as a star, the speed of light will change and its direction of propagation will change. All these changes in light ultimately stem from changes in the surrounding energy density.If this is the way that light from supernovae travels, then it tells us something important about why the universe is expanding, Annila explains. When a star explodes and its mass is combusted into radiation, conservation requires that the number of quanta stays the same, whether in the form of matter or radiation. To maintain the overall balance between energy bound in matter and energy free in photons, the supernovae are, on average, moving away from each other with increasing average velocity approaching the speed of light. If dark energy or any other additional form of energy were involved, it would violate the conservation of energy.The analysis applies not just to supernovae, but to other “bound forms” of energy as well. When the bound forms of energy in stars, pulsars, black holes, and other objects transform into electromagnetic radiation – the lowest form of energy – through combustion, these irrevocable transformations from high energy densities to low energy densities are what cause the universe to expand. More information: Arto Annila. “Least-time paths of light.” Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 416, 2944-2948 (2011) DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2966.2011.19242.x Explore further If the universe’s expansion is due to mechanisms that “break matter to light,” then the universe’s expansion is expected to follow a sigmoid curve. Image credit: Qef, Wikimedia Commons In a new study, that’s what Arto Annila, Physics Professor at the University of Helsinki, is doing. The basis of his argument, which is published in a recent issue of the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, lies in the ever-changing way that light travels through an ever-evolving universe.“The standard model of big bang cosmology (the Lambda-CMD model) is a mathematical model, but not a physical portrayal of the evolving universe,” Annila told PhysOrg.com. “Thus the Lambda-CMD model yields the luminosity distance at a given redshift as a function of the model parameters, such as the cosmological constant, but not as a function of the physical process where quanta released from a supernova explosion disperse into the expanding universe. “When the supernova exploded, its energy as photons began to disperse in the universe, which has, by the time we observe the flash, become larger and hence also more dilute,” he said. “Accordingly, the observed intensity of light has fallen inversely proportional to the squared luminosity distance and directly proportional to the redshifted frequency. Due to these two factors, brightness vs. redshift is not one straight line on a log-log plot, but a curve.”As a result, Annila argues that the supernovae data does not imply that the universe is undergoing an accelerating expansion. The principle of least timeAs Annila explains, when a ray of light travels from a distant star to an observer’s telescope, it travels along the path that takes the least amount of time. This well-known physics principle is called Fermat’s principle or the principle of least time. Importantly, the quickest path is not always the straight path. Deviations from a straight path occur when light propagates through media of varying energy densities, such as when light bends due to refraction as it travels through a glass prism. The principle of least time is a specific form of the more generally stated principle of least action. According to this principle, light, like all forms of energy in motion, always travels on the path that maximizes its dispersal of energy. We see this concept when the light from a light bulb (or star) emanates outward in all available directions. Light disperses from a supernova explosion (yellow) to a site of detection (blue). As the universe expands, the light energy becomes diluted as it travels from its past, dense surroundings to its present, sparse surroundings. The light’s wavelength increases as a result of the decrease in surrounding energy density. Image credit: Annila. ©2011 Royal Astronomical Society In the relationship between the distance and redshift of Type 1a supernovae, the data (points) agree with the equation in which light propagates through the expanding universe on the least-time path (solid line). Image credit: Annila. ©2011 Royal Astronomical Society “On-going expansion of the universe is not a remnant of some furious bang at a distant past, but the universe is expanding because energy that is bound in matter is being combusted to freely propagating photons, most notably in stars and other powerful celestial mechanisms of energy transformation,” Annila said. “Thus, today’s rate of expansion depends on the energy density that is still confined in matter as well as on the efficacy of those present-day mechanisms that break matter to light. Likewise, the past rate of expansion depended on those mechanisms that existed then, just as the future rate will depend also on those mechanisms may emerge in the future. Since all natural processes tend to follow sigmoid curves when consuming free energy in the least time, also the universe is expected to expand in a sigmoid manner.”Not a one-trick ponyWhile the concept of light’s least-time path seems to be capable of explaining the supernovae data in agreement with the rest of our observations of the universe, Annila notes that it would be even more appealing if this one theoretical concept could solve a few problems at the same time. And it may – Annila shows that, when gravitational lensing is analyzed with this concept, it does not require dark matter to explain the results.Einstein’s general theory of relativity predicts that massive objects, such as galaxies, cause light to bend due to the way their gravity distorts spacetime, and scientists have observed that this is exactly what happens. The problem is that the deflection seems to be larger than what all of the known (luminous) matter can account for, prompting researchers to investigate the possibility of dark (nonluminous) matter.However, when Annila used Maupertuis’ principle of least action to analyze how much a galaxy of a certain mass should deflect passing light, he calculated the total deflection to be about five times larger than the value given by general relativity. In other words, the observed deflections require less mass than previously thought, and it can be entirely accounted for by the known matter in galaxies.“General relativity in terms of Einstein’s field equations is a mathematical model of the universe, whereas we need the physical account of the evolving universe provided by Maupertuis’ principle of least action,” he said. “Progress by patching may appear appealing, but it will easily become inconsistent by resorting to ad hoc accretions. Bertrand Russell is completely to the point about the contemporary tenet when saying that ‘all exact science is dominated by the idea of approximation,’ but fundamentally, any sophisticated modeling is secondary to comprehending the simple principle of how nature works.”Annila added that these concepts can be tested to see whether they are the correct way to analyze supernovae and interpret the universe’s expansion.“The principle of least-time free energy consumption claims by its nature to be the universal and inviolable law,” he said. “Therefore, not only the supernovae explosions but basically any data will serve to test its validity. Consistency and universality of the principle can be tested, for example, by perihelion precession and galactic rotation data. Also the final results of Gravity Probe B for the geodetic effect appear to me certainly good enough to test the natural principle, whereas recordings of the tiny frame-dragging effect are compromised by large uncertainties as well as by unforeseeable but illuminating experimental tribulations.”
Free Webinar | Sept 5: Tips and Tools for Making Progress Toward Important Goals “If I’ve never directly worked with you or if you’ve never directly worked for me, don’t bother sending me a connection request on LinkedIn. It’s not gonna happen. I’ll just click ‘Ignore.’”Those are the wise words of a friend of mine who works in New York City as a top executive at one of the Big Four broadcast TV networks.At first, I thought she was being harsh. But as more and more LinkedIn connection requests trickled, then poured in for me from people I didn’t know any better than a random passerby on the street, I changed my mind.Related: LinkedIn Tips: 10 Ways to Get the Most Out of Your NetworkI stopped accepting connection requests from total strangers. And I stopped sending them to people I haven’t met or haven’t actually worked with, too.If I don’t know you, have never directly done business with you, and we don’t even work in a remotely similar industry and have zero connections in common, please don’t ask me to connect with you on LinkedIn. Like my friend said, it’s not gonna happen. Not anymore.Your good name is on the line on LinkedIn. It’s not like Facebook or Instagram. The difference: it’s for professionals only. Well, it’s supposed to be.Connection requests are nothing like friend requests. I think they’re much more serious and that the professionals I align myself with on LinkedIn should reflect nothing less than positively on me and I on them. That’s not something I take lightly. If you want to keep your professional reputation intact, you probably shouldn’t either.Here are three reasons to shoot down LinkedIn Connection requests (hopefully politely, not like Kelly Blazek):1. You don’t know the requester from Adam. Connecting with someone on LinkedIn isn’t like introducing yourself and handing them your business card at an in-person networking event. It’s more like you’re both vouching for each other’s professional experience and skills. You’re entering into a mutual circle of professional trust. That said, if you don’t know someone at all and have zero connections in common, it’s probably best to ignore their request.Even LinkedIn says you should only “connect with those you know and trust.” I can’t think of any strangers I know and trust. Can you?”To be a connection on LinkedIn, I would wait until you have some kind of rapport,” Lizzie Post, co-author of Emily Post’s Etiquette (William Morrow, 2011), recently told the Washington Post.Related: 3 Ways You Might Be Screwing Up Your LinkedIn Profile and How to Avoid ThemIf you don’t recognize the requester’s name at all, you obviously haven’t established rapport with them and you probably have no idea what the individual’s professional reputation is.It’s best to steer clear and skip the connection. If you do accept them (instead of clicking “Ignore” or “I Don’t Know [Name]”), beware: know that you’re granting a complete stranger carte blanche to your trusted professional network, which they’ll be able to freely snoop around in. They might even contact your connections to ask about you.2. The requester was lazy and didn’t customize his or her connection request.LinkedIn’s standard (and drab) connection verbiage, “I’d like to add you to my professional network on LinkedIn,” is basically code for “I couldn’t be bothered to personalize my connection request, so please ignore it now.”Not customizing an invite is like leaving a voicemail or sending a text or email that simply says, “My name is Kim. Bye.” It’s not enough by a longshot. Go the extra mile and briefly explain how you already know — not merely know of — the person, because, again, as LinkedIn cautions (via a link posted directly below the connection invitation personal note box), “Connecting to someone on LinkedIn implies that you know them well.”Related: 17 Must-Have Features on Your LinkedIn Profile (Infographic)Take the time to mention where and how you worked together before or how you are otherwise directly well acquainted. If that doesn’t jog the person’s memory, you probably shouldn’t have tried to connect in the first place.3. The requester looks and feels like a spammer.If you receive a connection request from someone you don’t know who is advertising goods or services, it might not be a person at all. It could be a spam bot. Or, yes, a real (sales!) person with spammy intentions. Both are equally lame and both deserve LinkedIn “Report as Spam” as option.Spammers trolling LinkedIn often don’t have a profile picture. Follow this simple formula to avoid falling into their trap: No face = no connection. Another red flag: the perpetrator might also be from a far off country that you’ve never visited.Reporting a suspicious connection invite that stinks of spam automatically archives the invitation and tips off LinkedIn so it can investigate. You could also just click “Ignore,” but it won’t do much to stop the spammer from bugging other LinkedIn users. Whatever you do, don’t open any attachments or click on any links within a suspect connection request.Related: 10 Questions to Ask When Creating Your LinkedIn Company Page April 17, 2014 5 min read Attend this free webinar and learn how you can maximize efficiency while getting the most critical things done right. Register Now »
Youtube faced backlash for another content regulation problem when videos of young children with exposed private parts began surfacing. These videos also displayed advertising from major brands alongside the content, leading to major companies like Nestle, Disney, Fortnite pull these YouTube ads from the identified videos. This issue was first discovered on Sunday, when Matt Watson, a video blogger, posted a 20-minute clip detailing how comments on YouTube were used to identify certain videos in which young girls were in activities that could be construed as sexually suggestive, such as posing in front of a mirror and doing gymnastics. Youtube received major criticism from companies and individuals alike for recommending videos of minors and allowing pedophiles to comment on these posts, with a specific time stamp of the video of when an exposed private part of the young child was visible. YouTube was also condemned for monetizing these videos allowing advertisements for major brands like Alfa Romeo, Fiat, Fortnite, Grammarly, L’Oreal, Maybelline, Metro: Exodus, Peloton and SingleMuslims.com, etc to be displayed on these videos. Companies pull out ads from Youtube Following this news, a large number of companies pulled their advertising spending from YouTube. Grammarly told Wired, “We’re absolutely horrified and have reached out to YouTube to rectify this immediately, we have a strict policy against advertising alongside harmful or offensive content. We would never knowingly associate ourselves with channels like this.” A spokesperson for Fortnite publisher Epic Games told Wired, that it had paused all pre-roll advertising on YouTube. “Through our advertising agency, we have reached out to YouTube to determine actions they’ll take to eliminate this type of content from their service,” Fortnite added. Disney and Nestle have also paused advertising on YouTube. Replying to these accusations, a Youtube spokesperson said in an email, “Any content –including comments — that endangers minors is abhorrent and we have clear policies prohibiting this on YouTube. We took immediate action by deleting accounts and channels, reporting illegal activity to authorities and disabling violative comments.” People on Twitter have strongly condemned YouTube’s actions. Youtube also recently updated its algorithm, introducing a new strikes system to make its community guidelines more transparent and consistent. They are introducing more opportunities for everyone to understand Youtube’s policies, a consistent penalty for each strike, and better notifications. Last month, YouTube announced an update regarding YouTube recommendations aiming to reduce the recommendations of videos that promote misinformation and conspiracy theories. Read Next YouTube bans dangerous pranks and challenges Youtube promises to reduce recommendations of ‘conspiracy theory’. Ex-googler explains why this is a ‘historic victory’. Is YouTube’s AI Algorithm evil?