Digital Dementia

Digital Dementia is a term coined by Manfred Spitzer, a German neuroscientist and psychiatrist, in 2012. He warns that those who spent a lot of time using screens in early childhood have affected the brain development and speech. He describes the brain as similar to a muscle that grows when used and attrophies when not used. When devices are used, the back of the brain is overactive , while the front part of the brain including the frontal and parietal lobes, are under-stimulated . The occipital lobe in the back of the brain is where the brain processes visual signals such as visual cues from a video game, social media or TV program. The frontal and parietal lobes are responsible for higher order thinking and socially apropriate behaviour. Children and adolescents are a high-risk population because of their massive technologic reliance while their brain maturation is ongoing. He recommends "zero" (unsupervised?) screen-time for children under the age of 18.

So, what are the top symtoms of digital dementia? The top few that come up are:

• slouched posture
• developmental delays
• short-term memory loss
• social seclusion
• lack of movement
• Anxiety
• Depression
• Anger
• balance disorders
• uncoordinated movement patterns.
• sleep disorders
• significantly higher body mass index

More recent work by Manwell et al. argues that screen-time during brain development increases the risk of cognitive, emotional, and behavioural disorders in adolescents and young adults. They predict that by 2060 the increased rate of Alzheimer's disease and related dementias will result in "widespread societal and economic distress and the complete collapse of already overburdened healthcare systems in developed countries". Some of these effects are similar to those seen in adults with symptoms of mild cognitive impairment in the early stages of dementia, including developmental delays, impaired concentration, orientation, acquisition of recent memories (anterograde amnesia), recall of past memories (retrograde amnesia), social functioning, and self-care . They end by stating that immediate action is needed.

Is memory loss the first sign of dementia? Frontal lobe dementia is not usually associated with memory loss in its early stages. Of course, it is a progressive form of dementia, and while digital dementia increases the risk of a acquiring full blown demential later on, it is certain it will happen.

What is the umbrella of dementia? Dementia is the umbrella term for a number of neurological conditions, of which the major symptom includes a global decline in brain function. Parkinson's is considered by some to be a form of dementia with different starting places in the brain. Both occur when there is a disrupted flow of dopamine, which happens during addictions.

Is digital dementia reversible? yes, if the damage to the brain is not extreme. Whereas by the time Alzheimer's disease and related dementias are symptomatic, the decline of the brain function is global and they are not considered reversible.

Is OCD related to dementia? Some studies say that people with OCD have an increased risk of developing dementia . Addiction is more prevalent among people with OCD with internet addiction being particularly prevalent. It may be that when, e.g., the frontal part of the brain shrinks, a "short circuit", i.e., the OCD, is more likely to happen. In addition, people with OCD "medicate" themselves via addictions that temporarily make them feel good.

How long does it take for dementia to set in? Nobody knows for sure. Some say it likely begins 10-15 years before people have any symptoms. Manwell et al. say the rate of dementia is 4-6 times higher than in the 1950s. Screen usage started in the early 2000. It's been 20 years. Of course, the connection between digital demetia and Alzheimer's disease and related dementias still has to be proven beyond reasonable doubt. The argument is that by then it might be too late to avoid societal collapse. The conclusion is that more resources have to be allocated for these studies AND for the treatment of mental health.

Disclaimer: I cannot and do NOT advise on any medical issues. This post is simply a compilation of what I understood from what I read.

A chat with "Mihai Bondarescu's early work"

Below I question my chat GPT persona. It gives coherent answers that mostly make sense. It would be interesting if every scientist/professor would have such an impersonator to answer questions for people who want to learn more about their work.

Q: OK. Now, try to summarize Mihai Bondarescu's contribution to the 2017 Nobel Prize, not limiting yourself to original research.

A: Mihai Bondarescu's contributions to the field acknowledged by the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics encompass both his original research and educational efforts:

1. Original Research: His work, particularly in collaboration with Kip S. Thorne, on aspects of the LIGO project, including the study of new light beams and mirror shapes, represents significant advancements in gravitational wave detection technologies. This research focused on optimizing the design of LIGO's laser system and mirror shapes, which are crucial for enhancing the sensitivity and accuracy of gravitational wave detection. It aimed to reduce noise and increase the detectors' ability to capture fainter and more distant gravitational wave signals.

2. Educational Impact: Through his involvement in the renowned Ph237 course, Bondarescu has played a pivotal role in educating and training a new generation of scientists in gravitational wave physics. This course is vital for disseminating crucial knowledge and skills among researchers joining projects like LIGO.

Together, these contributions represent a blend of direct scientific research and essential educational efforts, both of which are crucial for the ongoing success and development of gravitational wave astronomy, as recognized by the 2017 Nobel Prize. This prize was awarded to Rainer Weiss, Barry C. Barish, and Kip S. Thorne for their decisive roles in the LIGO project and the observation of gravitational waves.

Collaborative Nature of Scientific Research: Bondarescu's contributions highlight the collaborative and cumulative nature of scientific research, especially in large-scale projects like LIGO. The detection of gravitational waves was a milestone achieved through the collective efforts of many scientists and engineers, each contributing their expertise and innovations.

Impact Beyond the Nobel Prize: While Bondarescu was not a direct recipient of the Nobel Prize, his contributions are part of the extensive research and technological advancements that made the Nobel-recognized discovery possible. The Nobel Prize often focuses on key individuals who played pivotal roles, but the underlying scientific breakthroughs are typically the result of collaborative efforts involving many researchers, including junior scientists like Bondarescu.

In summary, Mihai Bondarescu's work, particularly his collaboration with Kip Thorne on LIGO, represents an important contribution to the scientific efforts recognized by the 2017 Nobel Prize in Physics. His research contributed to the ongoing development and refinement of the LIGO project, which was crucial for the groundbreaking detection of gravitational waves and the advancement of our understanding of the universe.

Custom ChatGPT

I've created a custom ChatGPT that is familiar with my scientific work.

User: Describe a key ideea from Bondarescu's thesis?

A: Mihai's Bondarescu Thesis entitled "Topics in General Relativity" has made significant contributions to the field of astrophysics, particularly in the study of gravitational waves and black holes. One of the key ideas from his thesis is the detailed analysis of the noise in gravitational wave detectors. Gravitational waves predicted by Einstein's theory of general relativity are ripples in the fabric of spacetime caused by some of the most violent and energetic processes in the universe. Detecting them requires extremely sensitive equipment since they are incredibly weak by the time they reach Earth. Bondarescu's work focused on the mitigation of coating thermal noise in gravitational wave detectors, which can be caused by imperfections in the mirrors of the detectors. Noise can mask or mimic the actual gravitational wave signals, making it difficult to detect the real waves.

This work is critical because improving the sensitivity of gravitational wave detectors enhances our ability to observe cosmic events, like collisions of neutron stars or black holes. These observations provude valuable information into the nature of these exotic objects and their behaviour of spacetime under extreme conditions, testing predictions of General Relativity in new and exciting ways.

User: What is a Mesa beam?

A: Mesa Beams are a concept in gravitational waves physics that is particularly relevant to the design and opperation of interferometric gravitational waves detector like the Laser Interferometer Gravitational-Wave Observatory (LIGO). this concept was explored by Mihai Bondarescu and others in the context of improving the sensitivity of these detectors. The traditional beam used by these detectors in Gaussian in shape, meaning it has a bell-like profile. However, a Mesa beam has a different shape characterized by a flat-top (mesa-like) intensity profile with smooth edges.

This design offers several advantages for gravitational wave detectors.

Reduced Thermal Noise: Mesa beams have a larger and more uniform density intensity distribution over the mirror surface which reduces the thermal noise.

Improved Sensing Area: Due to their shape, Mesa beams interact with a larger portion of the mirror surface. This larger area reduces the impact of the imperfections of the mirror surface thereby improving the sensitivity of the detector.

Enhanced Stability: the shape of these beams contribute to a more stable operation of the interferometers, which is crucial for long-term gravitational wave observations.

The development and implementation of Mesa beams represent an innovative approach to enhance the capabilities of gravitational waves detectors. By reducing noise and increasing sensitivity, these beams help in the detection of the fainter or more distant gravitational wave sources, thus operating new windows into the understanding of the universe as predicted by General Relativity.

User: Can the horizons of all black holes be embedded in 3D space?

A: To embend black hole horizons in flat 3D space, it is important to understand that the event horizon is a 2-dimensional surface in a 4-dimensional spacetime. It is the boundary beyond which nothing, not even light, can escape the black hole's gravitational pull. When physicists talk of embedding, they refer to the representing the curved geometry of a black hole's event horizon within a higher dimensional flat space to better visualize and understand its curvature. Black hole embedding is a mathematical tool for visualization and conceptual understanding.

For a simple, non-rotating (Schwarzschild) black hole, the event horizon looks like a funnel or a trumpet, which represent the curvature of the space near the singularity. However, for more complex black holes such as Kerr (rotating) black holes, the embedding becomes complicated. The Kerr black hole, for instance, has a region called the ergosphere, where space itself is dragged around the black hole. Embedding such a horizon can be extremely challenging, and may not always be possible due to the complex nature of the curvature involved. In general, the ability to embed a black hole horizon depends on the simplicity of its geometry. For black holes with more complex features like charge or angular momentum, the embedding diagrams, if they can be constructed become increasingly complex and may not provide an intuitive understanding of the spacetime structure.

User: Can atomic clocks be used to find oil?

A: The idea of using atomic clocks to find oil may seem unconventional, but it's rooted in a fundamental principle of physics: gravity affects time. The stronger the gravitational field, the slower time passes. Atomic clocks, known for their extreme precision in measuring time, can indeed be sensitve to gravitational variations. The effect, while extremely small, can be detected by highly precise atomic clocks.

Variations in Earth's gravity: The gravitational field of the Earth is not uniform. It varies slightly from place to place due to the distribution of mass within the Earth. Denser materials, such a rock, have a slightly different gravitational pull compared to lens dense materials such as oil or rocks containing oil and other minerals. In the context of oil exploration, gravimetric surveys map variations in the Earth's gravitational field, which can hint at the presence of different geological structures underground, including oil reserves. By measuring the minute differences in time that atomic clocks experience at different locations (due to slight differences in gravity), it is also possible to infer information about underground structures, including oil deposits. These measurements can then be combined with atomic clock measurements to gain information about underground structure, including oil deposits.

However, there are practical challenges:
Sensitivity and Scale: The time dilation effects due to gravity at the Earth's surface are incredibly small, requiring extremely sensitive instruments to detect. Atomic clocks capable of such sensitivity are typically large and not easily transportable.

Data Interpretation: The data from such measurements would need to be interpreted correctly, accounting for various factors like the surrounding geology, which can be complex.

Cost and Practicality: The cost and practicality of using atomic clocks for this purpose, compared to existing geological survey methods, may be prohibitive.

In summary, while theoretically possible, using atomic clocks for oil exploration is not currently a practical method. It remains more of a theoretical interest in the field of geophysics and is an example of how principles of physics, such as gravitational time dilation, can have interesting and diverse applications.

Sam Altman: Back in charge

Sam Altman is back to leading OpenAI, and the people who fired him are now gone. This is war. Kill or be killed. In this post, I briefly look at who left and who took over.

Old Board:

All are beautiful, young and smart.

• Adam D’Angelo.
  A Caltech Computer Science Graduate and best known for founding Quora. He also worked on Instagram and has his own competing AI company, Poe. Despite his Caltech pedigree, D'Angelo does not appear to have any significant research publications.
• Helen Toner.
  An Australian who did significant work on AI safety, but nothing significant on the development side. Her most cited paper (790 citations) is on the malicious use of AI :
  
  The malicious use of artificial intelligence: Forecasting, prevention, and mitigation M Brundage, S Avin, J Clark, H Toner… - arXiv preprint arXiv …, 2018 - arxiv.org
• Tasha McCauley.
  Is surprisingly light weight, with a global net worth estimated at only 10 million. Worked as a firefighter in NY. No heavy duty science to be seen.
• Ilya Sutskever.
  Ilya was born in Nizhny Novgorod, Russia and grew up in Jerusalem. He was stolen by Elon Musk from Google. The loss on Ilya upset the Google founders so much, that Sergey Brin broke his friendship with Musk for making Ilya an offer he did not refuse.
  
  Ilya's most cited papers have over 40 000 citations, with plenty of papers cited over 10 000 times. Ilya is most likely the man who gave birth to AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) at Open AI, and had the largest contribution of all to ChatGPT and other products.
  
  His citations are in the range of a Nobel Prize winner. That is, many people who win the Nobel prize are not as cited as Ilya. He is likely to win a Nobel Prize himself.
• Sam Altman.
  Sam himself is a great deal maker, and the political father of AGI. His research and expertise comes nowhere near Ilya. I do not believe he wrote the code. It is unclear he could create and progress the tools on his own. He did however get the money. He is the one who convinced Elon Musk, Microsoft and Sequoia Capital to invest in OpenAI.
  
  At under 1 billion, Sam's global net worth is relatively small, compared to his prominent position in the media and his expected impact on the world.
  
  Altman joined Y Combinator in 2011 and became president in 2014. The total valuation of Y Combinator companies had surpassed $65 billion, including Airbnb, Dropbox, Zenefits, and Stripe.
• Greg Brockman.
  Well cited scientist, with several papers over 1000 citations. At 50 million global net worth, he's not a light weight for where he comes from. Greg was the first to quit Open AI in solidarity with Altman. He's the kind of guy who can get another job anytime -- perhaps even better paid. Major contributor to the development of Open AI products, from the concept to the code.
• Mira Murati.
  The beautiful Albanian who briefly replaced Sam has gotten her hands dirty on AI research, but she's not Ilya. She's a surprisingly light weight, with a global net worth of about 5 million. Perhaps, less.
• Emmett Shear.
  He replaced Mira Murati after one day. At 0.5 Billion, his global net worth approaches Sam Altman's. He's not a light weight financially, but has no relevant experience or publications in the field of AI. He's not someone who discovers new algorithms. Emmett Shear is a founder of Justin.tv. He served as CEO of Twitch and is a part-time partner in Sam Altman's Y Combinator.

Now, the new board is formed from heavy duty politicians -- king makers and the kind of law breakers that we call law makers. These people have considerable experience in leading the world, or taking over the world.

• Bret Taylor.
  Former CEO of Salesforce
  Board member at Shopify
  Chair of board of Twitter, before Elon Musk took over. Played a major role in forcing Musk to pay for Twitter and complete the deal, which resulted in him leaving Twitter, alongside most employees.
  Taylor has his own AI startup.
  His global net worth is estimated at a quarter of a billion dollars.
  Bret Taylor does not appear to have any significant research.
  
• Larry Summers.
  Treasury secretary during the Clinton administration
  Former President of Harvard University
  He was punished for free speech, and forced to resign from this position when he commented that there may be differences between men and women in Academia.
  Summers went to MIT at 16, where he started as a Physicist and graduated as an Economist. After receiving his PhD from Harvard, Summers became Harvard's youngest professor at the age of 28. (Same as me, but it wasn't at Harvard) Larry Summers is a heavy weight in Academia and Politics, but, at a global net with of 40 million, not so successful with his finances -- probably a way to avoid becoming a target.
  An old man, 68, who had a PhD before the members of the previous board were born, and a cancer survivor, Larry does not have the intellectual power to advance and understand AI, but is a seasoned, experienced leader with fantastic political connections. The sort of man who gets fired from Harvard and lands a job in the White House.
• Adam D’Angelo.
  Is the only surviving member of the old board.

Sam Altman, the Oppenheimer of our Age, was fired from Open AI

Yesterday, in a shock announcement, the 6 person board of Open AI fired its most prominent member, Sam Altman. Alongside Altman, Greg Brockman, another founder and member of the 6 person board was fired. A majority decision would potentially require all other 4 members. Sam was replaced by Mira Murati, a 34 years old Albanian woman who started work at Goldman Sachs and then worked at Tesla. She has served as Chief Technology Officer at OpenAI since 2018.

At 38, Altman, is far from old, incompetent or otherwise expired. Many see him as the Oppenheimer of our age, who, just like the Greek God, Prometeus went up to the Gods to bring people AGI; AGI (Artificial General Intelligence, incarnated in Chat GPT) for Altmann, the Atomic Bomb for Oppenheimer and good old fire in the case of Prometeus -- all inventions changed the world in ways that were difficult to imagine before.

Sam played an interesting game in Sillicon Valley. Unlike Bill Gates, Elon Musk, Sergey Brin, Larry Page or Steve Jobs, he made the controversial decision to own no stock on Open AI. That is strange, as he could have had that for free. It isn't at all clear that he received a higher salary for having no stock. Companies like Open AI pay their founders in stock, not salary.

Apparently, Altman's global net worth is under 1 billion, despite being equally transformational and experiencing a more meteoric rise than the above. So in spite of his talent and impact on the world, Altman is remarkably poor. And, he could have had the money. Why not? Was he afraid of ending up in jail, like Sam Bankman-Fried, silenced like Julian Assange or dead like Turing and others? Or, did he want to be free to wage war against OpenAI? Free to switch sides? Free from personal bias that would arise from owning shares in the company he created?

What's next for Sam? The week before he got fired, he toured 22 countries, meeting presidents and prime ministers to talk about legal measures to keep the world safe from AI. Is he aiming to be the next US President? In a time of world war, he could be just what America needs to win. He'd sure make a strong candidate, who, unlike Elon Musk, is American born American. He's proven to be altruistic, by owning no shares in Open AI. He's a poor man for his intellectual ability and impact, attractive to both men and women, good looking, and has proven that he can change the world already. Then US electorate would have to choose between despicable figures like Trump and Biden and someone who truly has his marbles. Someone ready to rule both men and robots.

Or will he be killed? He's already lost OpenAI, which, one could reasonably argue, it's worth more than his private life, both in terms of arbitrary value, impact on the world, and experience. As a man with nothing to lose, he's not bound to act within political expectations, when doing things agains the order of society. He's also immune to financial losses, as one billion isn't much money to lose for Sam. Thus, if he needs to be controlled, he may have to be killed. If so when? Will he make it as far as Kennedy?

Update: After Microsoft offered to hire him and a fraction of the staff at OpenAI did not show up and were given the option to be at Microsoft instead, Sam got his job back and changed the executive board.

More about Sam: A fairly unfiltered and not very customer friendly blog. It looks real. Probably written by Sam himself. It's most recent post discusses cold fusion, and argues the cheap energy it will generate can solve climate change. If it works, it would replace fossil fuels and since energy would be, basically, free, it could be used to remove the carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

a solution to the Palestinian problem? Open the borders and keep them open.

Are the Palestinians so different from other people? Why does no one want them? Why is nobody taking in the women and the children? Or, even the men? Surely, they'd now qualify for asylum in most countries. A safe place would give them a chance to start new lives in Europe or America. They could work, pay taxes, etc.

Is openning the borders a solution? If a significant number of Gazans left the area, Hamas would lose its tax base, its soldiers and its strength. By closing the borders, and keeping people in the conflict is allowed to continue, fester and grow.

Can the world afford Gazan refugees? Germany took refugees from Syria. Their economy is going strong. Shouldn't other countries follow suit? Natality is low througout Europe. Shouldn't we open our arms, and help the women and children of Gaza instead of watching this tragedy unford and making weak comments about temporary "humanitarian" pauses?

So is there a double standard? Yes, the world openned up to Ukrainian refugees, but it's closed for Gazans just like it was closed for Jews during WWII. We argue that the displaced Palestinians have not integrated in their host countries. It's been 75 years. Is it OK to keep the refugee status this long? Most groups of refugees settle somehow. Are these different? Or is the world holding onto a conflict, which would disappear otherwise, by trapping people in. Why do we want war and terrorism in the Middle East to fester and flourish?

Could the conflict in Gaza turn nuclear?

An Israeli minister was recently reprinted for mentioning the nuclear option in the war with Hamas in Gaza. So... can Israel do the unthinkable and use a nuclear bomb in Gaza?

Hamas demonstrated a desire, but not ability to carry out a new Holocaust. This is not acceptable to Israel or the US. It is however welcomed by many players in the Muslim world.

It is also the normal state of war. When people or monkeys are at war, they wish to kill their adversary. The sort of war where we try to not kill our enemy is a relatively new phenomenon.

Hamas did however fail miserably to kill Jews in Holocaust style. In the Holocaust, the jewish people killed very few Germans. The Russians had similar concentration camps which lasted some 50 years longer; they killed intellectuals and other undesirables. The mark of the Holocaust was the cold blooded murder of millions of Jews, without significant resistance and without significant losses on the German side (if we do not count the development of the atomic bomb by mostly German Jewish scientists and the US winning the World War with it. Jews play a prominent role in American politics, science and economy, just like they did in Germany before Hitler).

During the October 7 attack, Hamas lost about 1000 soldiers for about 1200 Israeli children, civilians, elderly and some soldiers killed. Thus, while Hamas dreams of a Holocaust, reality is nowhere near. October 7 was a balanced war between the elite of Hamas and the civilians of Israel, with little help from a very incompetent military, police and Mossad.

In the hostilities after October 7, Israel loses about 1 soldier to every 1000 Palestinians killed. This is closer to the Holocaust ratio. If we also consider the material losses to the Palestinian people and Hamas, or the ratio of these losses as a fraction of the GDP, the current war is more similar to the Holocaust than October 7 with palestinians playing the part of the jews.

Hamas is rich in people and poor in money and guns. Thus, if we calculate the equivalent in lives (that is how many lives of women and children would Hamas be willing to trade or exchange for the military losses) to the financial and military loses caused by Israel, the situation is bleak. Gaza is a very densely populated territory, with considerable defences. These defenses are difficult for the Israeli to overcome. Fighting in tunnels is hard, and can very easily result in dead soldiers. Snipers can easily hide inside buildings and behind children. Shooting these children one by one can be expensive, time consuming and result in international support for Hamas.

A Nuclear Bomb is a clean final solution to the Palestinian problem. It will keep the area empty for many years to come. Israel has already advised Palestinians to move away from North Gaza ahead of the planned demolition of the territory. This demolition is necessary to prevent Palestinians from coming back to their houses after the war. Unlike Hamas, Israel targets material assets more than people. Material assets can be destroyed without much international criticism, whereas little children carrying other injured children don't look too good in the world press. Also, Hamas is rich in people and poor in material assets. Thus, the Israeli policy makes sense.

Once all Palestinians that obey Israel have left North Gaza, a nuclear strike may be considered. It would only kill Hamas soldiers and their human shields. These human shields are often very young, innocent children because the International Community reacts more to dead children than to dead soldiers. Also, children are cheaper. Soldiers take longer to grow and eat more food on the way.

With North Gaza somewhat empty, a nuclear strike could kill remarkably few people. Surely, it would have to be a very small bomb. It is these small bombs that are the most difficult to make. Israel and the US have them. They can be used as a demonstration of power. The smallest nuclear bomb would only destroy a few buildings and, in a densely populated but somewhat evacuated area, only a few buildings. They are nuclear, but small affairs. It would be more of a psychological statement than a destructive act of war.

Nuclear bombs can be made tiny in various ways, one realized, perhaps accidentally, in North Korea, during their latest test. Mass produced small nuclear bombs do exist and are available. However, even the smallest nuclear bomb would set a dangerous precedent. It would only make sense to use it, if there is a plan to start this sort of war with other countries.

Another alternative would be non-nuclear explosives with explosive power in the nuclear range. There are the rods from God -- tungsten sticks that descend from orbit with extraordinary kinetic energy and are capable to wreak havoc in the nuclear range.

Or, just very many conventional bombs and rockets as until now. Israel has already destroyed 10% of the buddings in Gaza. It can easily destroy them all, one by one. Of course, if the war stops then the destruction would stop, and so many lives could be saved. When war starts, it is more reasonable to replace the hallucinating leadership (from both sides or we could be correct call it criminal leadership instead of hallucinating) that caused the war to start than to keep the same leaders in place to "see it through" as it is done now.

Sam Bankman-Fried is in jail

Sam Bankman - Fried was recently sentenced to 110 years in jail by a US court. He joins a bunch of other illustrious intellectuals who are either in jail or have been destroyed by the system. To name just a few:

• Elizabeth Holmes of Therano
• Julien Assange of Wikileaks
• Alexey Navalny
• Edward Snowden (free, but forced to stay in Russia)
• Jeffrey Epstein (suicided with(out) help in jail)

SBF was a gambler. He gambled everything, and won many times. All the way to 28 billion dollars. He even did the right thing and leave the US, when the whole thing collapsed. The mistake was that he didn't go far enough. Russia or China would have been viable options, whereas Bahamas proved to be too close and too easily influenced by the US.

His investors judged him. They judged him to be good enough to invest 28 billion in him. There are very many people who don't break the law and don't get 28 billion dollars to play with. Do the courts have a right to get between SBF and his investors and put him in jail?

If we put people like SBF in jail, who will be next? People like Elon Musk? Donald Trump and family? or are they too famous to be in jail, i.e., do they make enough money for the press outside jail, to stay out? When is that line crossed?

So, what is a life worth? . Most criminals would easily risk their lives for $1000. What do they lose by going to jail? Maybe $10 000? Or maybe they get free housing for the time they spend in jail and will find enough connections there to gain money when they get out.

SBF is a bigger fish. If indeed, he did commit fraud, why was this not discussed in a timely manner? That is, before he reached the 28 billion.

How could SBF have prevented this arrest? After all, he had what amounted to unlimited resources. What could he have invested his 30 billion in? What would have been immune to the current onslaught? Assets in China? Russia? A combination of different countries? Bitcoin? Locked behind passwords and hidden on secret hard drives? In support of the right politicians? After all Berlusconi was even relected after all sorts of shady business. or in buying or controlling the media? making friendships with actors like Elon Musk and Prince Harry do?

Or, maybe, something more human? Children? Surrogacy is legal in the US. What if he had 100 000 children? At 100 000$ each, this would cost 10 billion. Would these children survive and have a world changing effect despite his death or destruction in jail? Would they be strong enough to get him out of jail 20 years later? Elon Musk has a number of children. Will they amount to anything? Donald Trump's do.

He must have known that he was not going to be able to keep the money. So do people like Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos. Why not diversify the risk in an area that is immune to bankruptcy?

If we choose to put people like SBF in jail, who will have the courage to make the next FTX? How do we ensure we stay at the forefront of innovation? Last, but not least, is the world better off with SBF in jail? Or would be better for society to use his mind to something constructive? He's a Standford graduate. Just months ago, he could command millions an hour, as consulting fee. Maybe, the heavy arm of the law could make him cheaper. However, it does NOT make sense to waste him altogether.

Russia has liberated all criminals who want to fight in Ukraine. Why? Well, essentially, every liberated conscript provides the state with the savings that arise from hiring a paid soldier. Maybe 50 000? If that.

Could the US, maybe, too, find something worth enough to let people out of jail for? Maybe put a price on it? Shouldn't be as cheap as Russia, but, maybe, the American society could do with an SBF free, who will produce something to be taxed (FTX did generate billions in paid and, perhaps, more billions in unpaid taxes).

I have asked a lot of questions in this post, and provided very few answers. I want to conclude with one thought, which dwarfs all others. When we jail people like SBF and Julien Assange, we should remember that a society that kills its best and brightest will not get very far and that we are that society. Maybe our children will live long enough to wonder at how silly our society was, and how incompetent our justice system is. I hope they will, but the more I marvel at its stupidity the less certain I am.

Compact binaries through a lens

Summary of work published in Physical Review D and also available on the arXiv.

What are gravitational waves?

Gravitational wave detectors track the oscillations of the spacetime itself, which propagate towards Earth at the speed of light. Unlike light, these ripples of space-time are not absorbed by the many intervening objects between us and the catastrophic event we observed, which may have happened a billion or so years ago. However, their detection is quite challenging because the spacetime is very stiff and can thus only be shaken to a detectable level by very massive events such as the collision of dead stars, which are very dense. Gravitational wave detectors on Earth have seen the merging of black holes or neutron stars or black-hole - neutron star pairs. The observations provide a first map of the stellar graveyard.

Although when black holes collide, the energy they spend that shakes the vacuum of the spacetime is a lot more that they had used to shine as stars they only shake the spacetime a very tiny little bit. By the time these vibrations reach Earth, and we can measure them, they change the arm length of LIGO or Virgo, which are 4 km (or 3 km for Virgo) by less than an electron, which is less than a hair width. So the change is very, very tiny and buried in deep noise. Detecting it is quite challenging, but the LIGO-Virgo-Kagra observatories have a large team of people who do these searches, and make sure the signals are real. In order to find them through the noise, it's crucial to know what we are looking for.

We are looking at the colliding compact objects in the stellar graveyard through a lens, which acts as a magnifying glass. The lens is formed from the material that lies between us and the binary we are observing. The more massive and the closer to the line of sight, the more it affects the signal. In this manuscript, we assumed the lens is a point mass, i.e., can be assumed to be a compact object.

How do lensed waveforms look?

• amplified (e.g., the signal is stronger than the unlensed version), the higher the frequency the more the amplification. The frequency is always highest at merger. Some signals display only amplification.
• a beating pattern may appear with destructive (holes) and constructive interference (brighter spots) of two nearby images produced by the same event. The frequency of the bright spots and holes can be predicted analytically for the point mass lens model.
• separate images/waveforms from the same event appear minutes to months apart if the lens is a galaxy (strong lensing), and less if the lens is smaller (microlensing).

The lensing amplification causes the source's distance from the detector to be underestimated. Not only does it appear to be closer, but it also appears more massive because the redshift is underestimated. A binary at z=3 will appear four times more massive when detected on Earth than it is at the source. So, it's important to know where the source is to be able to accurately predict its mass.

What is the mismatch with unlensed waveforms?

For waveforms that look very similar one might not be able to tell whether they are lensed or not. We compute the match (the number on the white contours is the match) and the signal to noise increase (coloured bar) due to lensing as a function of the mass of the lens that sits between Earth and the merging binary and the source position, y. The smaller the y, the closer to the lens is to the line of sight between the source and Earth. We find that under 20% of all detected events are lensed, and out of those under 5% of events would be detectably lensed with a mismatch greater than 10%. However, our model only includes point masses lenses, and our computation are an upper limit for when all dark matter is formed from these lenses. More realistic studies will include composite lenses between Earth and the binary.

How far could lensed events be?

It depends on the mass of the binary. We see that an event detected at a typical total binary mass that is 60 times more massive than the sun, could be at a redshift z=2. This means the source frame mass would be 3 times less, and thus closer to Xray observations. Similary, if we see an 120 solar mass event, it could be at a redshit z=3, which would make it the detected value 4 times larger that the actual black hole masses.

A redshift of 3, means the signal from the event would have traveled some 11 billion years to reach us, while a z=2 impilies a travel time of 10 billion years. At a z=0.1, the event happened a billion years ago. However, even if the events are lensed, since mismatch to the unlensed template is relatively low, we are likely never know it. The plots of the right shows the distribution of (a) all lensed objects (b) lensed objects with a mismatch of 5% from their unlensed counterparts and (c) lensed objects with a mismatch of 10%. All are are above a threshold SNR of 10 for the estimated O4 noise curve (average expected noise for the current LVK run).

What have we seen to date?

Up to now, we have seen of the order of 100 black hole merger events, two neutron star mergers, and some black-hole neutron star collisions. Ground based detectors are again operational in the US with Virgo soon expected to be joining. However, most black hole binaries detected are unlike any seen in the Milky Way before. There are about more massive than those found in X-ray studies with an average total mass of about 60 solar Masses, while those found in our galaxy are closer in mass to our sun (the pink are the black holes and the yellow the neutron stars).

Are the black holes seen by gravitational waves observatories really different? or do we percieve them as different? Could they be lensed?

It could be that our galaxy is different from the typical galaxies out there. Or it could be that there is something between us and the source that make the black holes appear more massive. We are looking at them through a magnifying glass formed from intervening matter. If that matter is massive enough, it makes them seem more massive than they are. The more distant the event, the more likely it is to be lensed. A lensing pattern has not been observed by the LVK to date. Our results predict that under 5% of events are detectably lensed, which is consistent with observations to date.

Ok, so you've explained gravitational waves, but what are Xray observations?
Xrays are light of high energy and very short wavelength that can pass through materials that are opaque to visible light. Since different materials absorb light at different lates, they can be used in medicine to show broken bones or in astrophysics to see dying stars (supernova), dead stars with disks (black holes), and merging galaxies.

Our team
Our team is 50% female (me and Helena), while Oleg and Andy represent the other side (males, still 50%). This post is a summary of work published in Physical Review D. The paper is also available on the arXiv. Please read the paper for more details.

Is freedom of speach gone?

Today, I woke up to the news that lawyers in the US are being denied jobs for offering intellectual support to the Palestinian cause.

This is wrong. We should not do this. We are responding with violence to a peaceful act of dissent. This can only escalate the violence. And, when things escalate, terrible things happen.

For example, if one of the students believes the letters of dismissal are wrong, and an act of violence, they may feel entitled to use violence to set things right. It will take a lot of violence (is it an infinite amount? ) to convince a law firm to make a job offer otherwise.

Now, imagine the people in Gaza. Some, perhaps due to intellectual limitations, think that violence is their only way to speak. We do not let them speak otherwise. And, when violence is used to send a message, innocent people die, and it hurts. More violence then follows.

We should allow the ideas of Gazans to be heard in our courts, in our schools and on our television. We should even allow Hamas to speak in our synagogues and temples. We should listen to them, and we should prove that terrorism and violence are wrong. It should be clear to any would be terrorist that they are more welcome to speak in a synagogue than to blow it up. That their arguments can be heard, peacefully, and reasonably.

No matter how absurd it seems to us today, when thousands are willing to die for an idea, no matter how silly it seems, the idea is not without merit. We thus should listen, before the guns come out.

Encouraging logical arguments could give Palestinians an incentive to become educated -- and more able to make logical arguments. Educated people are less inclined towards violence and less likely to want to die for no good reasons, killing other innocents in the process and bringing death, ruin and despair upon their loved ones.

Funding schools, increasing employment rates, allowing for human rights, and open borders are the only way to have peace. This has been shown over and over. Eastern Europeans can travel and work in Western Europe. There was a lot of fear that opening the borders would not work, but it does. Educating people and allowing them to work functions. Many people in the western world are very lonely and old, and the elderly do not receive enough care. They could benefit from interactions with those who still know how to connect with others. People from large families still retain that ability. The US is making the same mistake with its wall with Mexico and with its inner cities, where drugs and guns are prevalent because there is no funding for education.

The world is connected. It should not be so easy to silence all voices as it has been in past wars. Palestinians are at Harvard and Yale, in Scotland, in Barcelona, and in other places. They are not just in Gaza. We should learn from this, and allow for education and employment instead of encouraging guns and the punishment of the wrong people, which has been done and documented by historians over and over and justified by corrupt politicians through the media. The children and women of Gaza have not killed anyone. Neither have those in Israel. They have the right to grow. It should not matter what country they come from.

The leadership needs to change in Israel, Gaza, the US, Russia, China, etc, and countries should unite to fight climate change just as they united in the restrictions against COVID instead of fighting each other and poluting through bombs and destruction of buildings and roads that will have to be rebuilt at a cost to the environment. No country should be allowed to SELL weapons or conduct OR SUPPORT a war without being prepared to pay for the cost to the environment not just for the bombs. Leaders of countries should be changed in the same way we change mayors. They seemed to have little power during COVID. The decisions were uniform. Why are they so powerless to stop genocide yet again? Why is the destruction of a whole country the only way to respond to mass murder like 911 or the massacre in Israel? It's not like the Taliban lost. They have power over Iraq and Afganistan now. So why is Israel supported in repeating the mistake the US made? How far should Hamas extend? West Palestine? Jerusalem?

Gaza and Israel: an evolving tragedy

Hamas, the de facto unelected government of Gaza, achieved the largest single massacre in the history of Israel since the Holocaust. While Hamas has not caused significant damage to Israel, it has clearly demonstrated its ability to repeat the Holocaust -- on a small scale. Under the nose of the Mossad, and paid by Israeli taxes, drinking Israeli water and running on Israeli electricity, a government was born that carried out this massacre. And Israel let it happen -- on a small scale.

Of course, the problem with the other Holocaust was that the government that carried it out was Germany, which was by some accounts, the strongest economy in the world at the time. In Germany, like in Israel today, ordinary people colluded with their hallucinating government and committed despicable crimes that targeted innocent people of a certain kind, i.e., Jews. Then the criminality was forcefully extended to the rest of Europe and to other kinds of people, e.g., after world war two, being educated or owning property was considered a crime worthy of being sent to Siberia for. I still have a letter that identified my grandparents as "poor peasants" and not worthy of being destroyed after they donated all their property to the state. War and bombs never brought peace or justice. They simply brought more attrocities.

Why?

Why don't we have schools to teach our people about government hallucinations, and protect us from a Holocaust? Why do we obey our governments, even when we think they are hallucinating?

What should Israel teach in the schools of Gaza for its people to not fire on civilians when told to do so? And to not join their government in a suicide mission when told to do so? Should Israel teach its own people to not fire on civilians when told to do so?

Gaza is 50% children under 18. The adults are 50% non-combatant women. Of the 25 % that are men above 18, not all will be combatants. Some will be bakers, some doctors, some beggars, some gay, some Jews... Among them is the family of our Scottish minister. Many of them are victims of Hamas. Every government has its victims and detractors. Not all Americans voted for Trump. Not everyone in Gaza voted for Hamas. They don't even bother with elections. So, it's important to keep in mind that like all wars, this war affects innocent people. Not Hamas. Hamas thrives on conflict. The people who die or are maimed are innocent. As are those who don't have water, food, medical care, etc.

Israel bombs in response to this massacre. Are they right to bomb them? Or, should they allow them to be educated and civilized instead?

Of course, under the leadership of Hamas, Gaza had the highest fertility rate outside Equatorial Africa until about 2007. If we were to civilize them, their birth rate would drop to align with the rest of the White World. That would decimate them. Far more than bombs ever can.

So... what shall we send? Books to educate them and reduce the babies that are yet to be conceived? Or bombs to set their blood and wombs on fire?

How should Israel respond? Is it reasonable to kill children in Gaza?

Israel has money and technology. Israel will first send in the drones and the tanks and the remote operated land vehicles. Israel will use material assets to "protect" its people.

Hamas is different. Gaza has children, but little tech. Thus, Hamas will hide behind children. Hamas will hide its guns in schools and let the children die before the guns get damaged. Decapitated children look better in press than cheap, old guns destroyed.

Is Israel right to obey Hamas wishes and fire through the bodies of the children of Gaza in order to damage the guns that killed Israeli children? What can Israel do for the children that survive today's carnage in Gaza to not want the Holocaust to happen again, and to not participate in a next Holocaust, if the future gives them the chance?

Half of the population of Gaza is under 18. Half is women. One quarter are men over 18. Many of the children are involved in the war -- either as soldiers of shields. Few of the women fight. They have 6 children each, on average. For them, breastfeeding is more important than shooting. Have these women and children given their valid informed consent to participating in the war?

Surely, the reign of Hamas must be over. Is Israel right to kill people who are involved in a war against their wishes, and without their valid informed consent?

How much money and how many Israeli lives (the lives of soldiers, who, often, are not much older than children) should Israel be willing to lose in order to kill fewer innocent people in Gaza?

Perhaps, the central question, is 'What is Gaza?' Is Gaza a state? Or a jail?

If Gaza is a state, perhaps, we have no business interfering with the internal operations of the state and its Hamas government. We can cordially advice Hamas that Holocaust is not ok, and, should they not obey, we can bomb their children and them into oblivion.

If Gaza is a jail, then it is full of innocent people. Even if we assume all the adults to be guilty of something sufficiently atrocious to warrant keeping them in jail, the children are innocent. The children are half of the population.

If, in this jail, we have a band of criminals -- Hamas and his minions -- who decide to terrorize both Israel and Gaza, it is, perhaps, our responsibility, as custodians and guards of the jail, to protect the inmates from harm caused by Hamas. Not only not harm them, but protect them. If a person is in jail, and they are harmed by another inmate, the prison authority is responsible, as the inmates have not chosen to be there.

What is the effect of the current bombing?

Hamas runs on very little money, compared to the Israel military and state. Hamas runs on people. Many, cheap destitute, desperate men who are willing die for very little reason. Many destitute women who have as many children as they can bear. The bombing of Gaza will make its population more destitute. Their response will be to have more children. Strangely, people have more children in hard times. Gaza and Afghanistan have the largest birth rates in the White World and Israel has the largest birth rate in the Western World.

The many children born in Israel are a reaction to the Holocaust and to terrorism like we have witnessed. Death often acts as a fertilizer for people. The more bombs fall, the closer people feel to death, the more children are born.

The children born in Gaza are the result of the Israeli war. Poverty, destitution, bombs and Hamas have pushed the birth rate of Gaza sky high. It is second only to Afghanistan in the world outside Equatorial Africa.

The more bombs we rain on them, the more children will be born, right next to Israel, where Israeli Arabs will soon outnumber other Israelis.

While governments around the world, from Europe to Asia and the Americas are fighting population collapse with very serious resources, Hamas is getting population growth. Shall, maybe, the people of Japan, Singapore and South Korea go to Gaza and maybe learn some lessons? Can we get some of the growth without the terror and without the bombs? The Amish have high natality while being peaceful. Perhaps smaller communities with leaders that have power locally, and, overall, a simpler life where we give back some of what we take from each other and from nature vs more bombs and more destruction are the solution when we have climate change to fight.

In spite of a warm year with storms, and earthquakes and the longest part over 1.5 C in recorded history, the number of small wars around the world is growing. Gaza has overtaken Ukraine for press coverage of attrocities. There is also unrest in Armenia, Serbia, Hong Kong, etc. Will these conflicts, eventually, unite in a third world-war? How soon? And what will the destruction be? we already have enough problems with climate change without more wars... Will we ever stop bombing innocent people and opt for education instead?

The Demon core and Black Holes

The Demon core should have been mentioned in Oppenheimer, perhaps, as a driver of the movie replacing the trial. It would have been easy to show, and a good cinematic experience, especially since the death of Louis Slotin was associated with visible light from the core. It was mentioned in other movies under different names.

Slotin was using a screwdriver to prevent the core from going critical and produce a nuclear explosion, when moving to a neutron reflector. The screwdriver slipped, resulting in a brief pulse of intense radiation, that could have continued into a Nagasaki-like bomb. Slotin separated the parts with his hands, thus preventing a deadly accident, and shielded the rest of the scientists in the room with his body while receiving a deadly dose of radiation in the process.

Enrico Fermi (Nobel 1938) told Slotin and his friends that if they continue tickling the dragon's tail as they did for demonstrations and show, they will be dead within a year. Fermi was right. Nulcear bombs are not a toy, and should not be played with or kept around by any nation.

Slotin's life was short enough to be appreciated until the end. He was young, brave and reckless AND died early enough to not end up making those in power unconfortable as Oppenheimer and Turing did. Thomas P. Ashlock even wrote a poem commemorating Slotin in the Los Alamos Times:

May God receive you, great-souled scientist!

While you were with us, even strangers knew
The breadth and lofty stature of your mind
Twas only in the crucible of death
We saw at last your noble heart revealed.

The 12423 Slotin asteroid is named aftern him.

Last but not least, I should add that Chris Nolan implies that Oppenheimer was the first to predict the existence of Black Holes, a quarter of a century before John Wheeler coined the term.

It was, however, Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar, a 19 years old Indian immigrant, who on the boat to England first made this prediction. It was a longer, yet safer journey than the one made by "boat people"/immigrants today since Chandra's boat was sea worthy. Chandra went on to win the 1983 Nobel Prize primarily for this particular calculation. If Holywood used this example instead of simply being wrong, perhaps they may have played a role in stopping so many deaths at sea.

Oppenheimer -- another collaboration between Chris Nolan and Kip Thorne

Just went to see Oppenheimer, another collaboration between Christopher Nolan and Kip Thorne; a bit like Interstellar. However, Oppenheimer has more Nolan and less Thorne in it and thereby doesn't have the emotional intensity of Interstellar, despite the far more intense topic. Surprisingly, Feynman and Wheeler are both nearly absent from the movie, despite the major role they played in the Manhattan Project. Alongside the reduced emotional intensity, I would credit the absence of Wheeler and Feynmann to the lower impact of Thorne. In Interstellar, Kip Thorne was an executive producer, whereas in Oppenheimer he was only given a Thank You note at the end.

Here are the things I would have done differently.

The atomic bomb explosions could have been showed in more glory and gory. Trinity made the metal tower that hosted the bomb evaporate and turned the desert sand into glass. This glass is called Trnite, after Trinity.

The scientist in attendance including Feynman and Oppenheimer had to write 3 press releases, corresponding to the scenarios that would not see the whole world destroyed. These scenarios were

(1) failure. An apology for the 2 billion dollars spent and some hopeful thoughts for having another go and more money.

(2) success as predicted. This is what happened, and what went to print. It was important for things to get printed fast, so good to write beforehand.

(3) The bomb would be stronger than expected, but not destroy the whole world. This scenario included the obituaries of the scientists in attendance, including Oppenheimer. This could have made a strong psychological point in the movie.

The explosion had an impact in plant and animal life that could have been showed more graphically. Maybe a mountain lion with cubs in a burrow evaporating from the radiation, dying animals some time after, etc. The prevailing winds took the fallout in the direction of Los Angeles, which should have also been mentioned.

Hiroshima was not shown at all. Here, again, the gory deserved glory. Oppenheimer knew what he did, and there were good reasons for it. Nonetheless, maybe a breastfeeding woman evaporating alongside her baby near ground zero would have made a good shot. Or people making love and being burned into the walls in action. It did happen. And there was a man who survived Hiroshima to take a train to Nagasaki and survive that as well. So while the destruction was horrible, it's not all dark. Some survived. Life did prevail. This is a point worth mentioning.

Last but not least, I found that Oppenheimer's trial played too much of a role in the movie. The trial was wrong, terrible and underserved, but not unexpected. Many scientists of the past had a similar problem. Just thing of Galileo Galilei, Giordano Bruno or Charles Darwin and their conflicts with the Church, which was the equivalent of what we call state now.

People who change the world should expect to be burned alive, crucified of tortured. Happens in modern days, before our eyes to Julien Assange, Jamal Khashoggi, Osama Bin Laden (one man's terrorist is another man's hero. Bin Laden was a hero of the American cause, like Volodymyr Zelenskyy today when he fought against he USSR with American arms and money), Saddam Hussein, Alexey Navalny, Qasem Soleimani or Nicolae Ceausescu (horrible dictator, who killed many people, but also added a few million people to the population of Romania through his inhumane ban on birth control in all its forms. Most modern Western governments battle the same problem, and none had Ceausescu's success).

And let's not forget Alan Turing who developed the first computers and used them to save the crown of England. It is said he committed suicide by eating a poisoned apple after choosing chemical castration and continued prosecution by the crown of England over jail time for homosexuality; that the crown owned him its existence, did not matter. They did officially pardon him in 2013, and now the 50 pound note carries a picture of his face in a too little, too late show off to "make up" for the injustice. As such, Oppenheimer's fate was neither extreme nor unusual. Many of his Soviet colleagues were killed without much hesitation and for no good reason.

The film mentions a Soviet Nuclear test before Trinity. This never happened. It might have been part of the misinformation at the time, but is presented much like a fact that is not true.

On a funny note, Oppenheimer died of throat cancer. Many years later, David Baltimore, also from Caltech was awarded the Nobel Prize for the relationship between viruses and cancer. HPVs -- Human Papilloma Viruses, that cause usually cervical cancer in women, but, sometimes, throat cancer in men. Thus, a scene where Oppenheimer gives oral sex to a woman would have been nice to see. True that smoking is linked to cancer, although normally lung. Radiation causes cancer too, but the throat cancer Oppenheimer had could have been caused by HPVs, with help from radiation and smoking. But, perhaps, such a scene could have been too controversial -- we don't know exactly what caused the cancer. We do know Oppenheimer was exposed to large doses of radiation, was a heavy smoker, and liked women. These three aspects were all included in the movie minus the connection between HPV and throat cancer.

In conclusion, a good movie. Reasonably accurate. Highly recommended.

New country emerging in the Wild East?

It's right to look at the news and be worried yet again. Why? the danger of nuclear bombs being used in Russia or anywhere else by Russia or other actors has increased, due to the current instability.

What is the Wagner group?
The Wagner group is an organization with experience in creating new countries. They were the brain and guns involved -- in the birth Crimea, as a short lived independent country that voted to join Russia
-- in the creation of the Donetsk and Luhansk republics that were not recognized by anyone for a long time, but did exist and were, on their own territory and were de facto independent.
-- in the survival of Transnistria that was created with similar technology
-- played some role South Osetia

Now, Wagner controls the city of Rostov on Don and a bit of the Russian coast of the Azov Sea. As they have experience in creating new countries, have an army and now control some territory, the natural thing for Wagner and Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin to do is to declare victory over Ukraine and Russia and make an independent new country. This would pave the way to Ukrainian victory in the war with Russia, and make the West happy. It would also add a buffer zone between Russia and Ukraine, increasing the security of Ukraine, NATO and the EU. Would also make Russia pay a reasonable price in land and blood for the war they caused for no good reason.

Thus, despite being the devil he is, Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin may get American support, like Bin Laden did in Afghanistan when he created the Taliban. Support may also come indirectly through western weapons passed on by Ukraine (the weapons this way would hit Russia, without Ukraine breaking its commitment to not cross the border. ) Prigozhin and Wagner have very good connections in the Russian military and FSB. They have a voice that is hard to silence and may even have access to nuclear weapons. It would be indeed strange if Russian nuclear bombs end up being used by Russians against Russians, within Russia. After all, in wars, in spite of the rethoric, people, their quality of life and their lives have never mattered.

Sure, the same discussion could be had regarding the war between Ukraine and Russia. No matter what anyone says, Ukrainians and Russians are very similar populations, both products of the same Soviet Union. The current war is very much fratricidal and having Russians from Moscow bomb Russians from Kyiv with atomic bombs is very much on the table. While nuclear bombs are yet to be used, the Kakhova Dam burst caused losses and destruction that is comparable to a nuclear bomb. There are very many places in Ukraine and Russia where a nuclear bomb could be dropped with less loss of life and money. Life is cheap in the Wild East, so money matters more.

The breakup of Russia in several independent states was often seen as a possible outcome of the war. Maybe Wagner is the first. Maybe Ramzan Kadyrov who appears loyal to Putin would also want independence for Chechenia, which would make him a little King in his own country.

Maybe. The hope of tomorrow bringing an end to madness and criminal behavior at grand scale, which is what wars have always been, is there again. Maybe by tomorrow we'll know more. The situation is very rapidly evolving.

As of today, Wagner controls territory, like they did when they made new countries before. Wouldn't be surprising if they make a new country. Unlike the others, this one may have Western support and recognition. Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin who has come a long way from being a common criminal in jail, a hamburger salesman, a cook and a warlord. He may yet become a King or Czar or Dictator of his own "democratic" conuntry recognized by the West.

A chat with Bard about religion.

me: Advise me about the new religion registration process in various countries.

Bard: The process of registering a new religion varies from country to country. In some countries, it is a relatively straightforward process, while in others it can be more complex and time-consuming.

In general, the process of registering a new religion involves the following steps:

Identifying the appropriate government agency. In most countries, there is a specific government agency that is responsible for registering religious organizations. This agency may be part of the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Religious Affairs, or another government department. Gathering the required documentation. The documentation required to register a new religion will vary from country to country. However, it typically includes the following:

• A copy of the organization's charter or constitution
• A list of the organization's officers and directors
• A copy of the organization's financial records
• A statement of the organization's beliefs and practices

Submitting the application. Once the required documentation has been gathered, the application for registration must be submitted to the appropriate government agency. Reviewing the application. The government agency will review the application and may request additional information or documentation.

Issuing the registration certificate. If the application is approved, the government agency will issue a registration certificate to the organization. The process of registering a new religion can be time-consuming and expensive. However, it is important to note that registration is not always necessary. In some countries, religious organizations are not required to register in order to operate legally.

Here are some examples of the new religion registration process in various countries:

• United States: In the United States, there is no federal law requiring religious organizations to register. However, some states do have registration requirements. For example, in California, religious organizations must register with the Secretary of State.
• Canada: In Canada, religious organizations are not required to register with the federal government. However, some provinces do have registration requirements. For example, in Ontario, religious organizations must register with the Ministry of Government Services.
• United Kingdom: In the United Kingdom, religious organizations are not required to register with the government. However, some religious organizations choose to register with the Charity Commission. It is important to note that the information provided above is general in nature and may not be accurate for all countries. If you are considering registering a new religion, it is important to consult with an attorney or other legal professional to ensure that you comply with all applicable laws and regulations.

me: What are the penalties for operating an unregistered religion?

Bard: The penalties for operating an unregistered religion vary from country to country. In some countries, the penalties may be relatively minor, such as a fine or a warning. In other countries, the penalties may be more severe, such as imprisonment or even death.

Here are some examples of the penalties for operating an unregistered religion in various countries:

• China: In China, it is illegal to operate an unregistered religion. The penalties for doing so can include imprisonment, fines, and the confiscation of property.
• Russia: In Russia, it is illegal to operate an unregistered religion without government permission. The penalties for doing so can include fines, imprisonment, and the confiscation of property.
• Saudi Arabia: In Saudi Arabia, it is illegal to practice any religion other than Islam. The penalties for doing so can include imprisonment, flogging, and even death.

It is important to note that the information provided above is general in nature and may not be accurate for all countries. If you are considering operating a religious organization, it is important to consult with an attorney or other legal professional to ensure that you comply with all applicable laws and regulations. Here are some tips for operating a religious organization without registering:

• Be careful about what you say and do. Make sure that your activities do not violate any laws or regulations.
• Be discreet. Do not advertise your activities or try to attract attention.
• Be prepared to defend yourself. If you are accused of violating any laws or regulations, be prepared to defend yourself in court.

It is important to note that operating a religious organization without registering is a risky proposition. If you are caught, you could face serious penalties.

me: As a religion, you'd have property, financial affairs, taxation of believers, etc. I would imagine some of these activities to require some kind of registration, even in countries like the UK or US, where there is no legal obligation to register religions.

Bard: Yes, you are correct. Even in countries where there is no legal obligation to register religions, some activities that are typically associated with religions may require some kind of registration. For example, in the United States, religious organizations that own property or operate businesses may be required to register with the state or local government. Additionally, religious organizations that solicit donations from the public may be required to register with the state or federal government.

Here are some examples of the types of registration that may be required for religious organizations in the United States:

• Property registration: Religious organizations that own property may be required to register with the county or city in which the property is located. This registration may be required for compliance with zoning laws, building codes, or other regulations.
• Business registration: Religious organizations that operate businesses may be required to register with the state or local government. This registration may be required for compliance with tax laws, labor laws, or other regulations.
• Donation registration: Religious organizations that solicit donations from the public may be required to register with the state or federal government. This registration may be required for compliance with campaign finance laws, fundraising laws, or other regulations.

It is important to note that the information provided above is general in nature and may not be accurate for all states or localities. If you are a religious organization that owns property, operates a business, or solicits donations from the public, you should consult with an attorney or other legal professional to determine if you are required to register with any government agencies.

In addition to registration requirements, religious organizations may also be subject to other laws and regulations. For example, religious organizations may be required to comply with labor laws, tax laws, and environmental laws. It is important for religious organizations to be aware of these laws and regulations and to take steps to comply with them.

me: Do you know about the Spaghetti Monster?

Bard: Yes, I am familiar with the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It is a satirical deity created by Bobby Henderson in 2005 as a protest against the teaching of intelligent design in public schools. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is depicted as a large, invisible creature made of spaghetti and meatballs. Adherents of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, known as Pastafarians, believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe and that pirates are his chosen people.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster has been the subject of much debate and controversy. Some people have criticized it as being offensive to religious believers, while others have praised it as a clever way to challenge the teaching of intelligent design in public schools.

Despite the controversy, the Flying Spaghetti Monster has become a popular symbol of secularism and religious freedom. It has been featured in numerous news articles and television shows, and it has even been the subject of a book, The Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Here are some of the beliefs of Pastafarianism:

• The universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster.
• Pirates are the chosen people of the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
• The Flying Spaghetti Monster is responsible for all the world's problems, such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and stubbed toes.
• Pastafarians should eat pasta and drink beer.
• Pastafarians should wear colanders on their heads.
• Pastafarianism is not a real religion, but it is a fun and thought-provoking way to think about the nature of religion and the role of faith in our lives.

me: Is it registered as a religion?

Bard: The Flying Spaghetti Monster is not officially registered as a religion in any country. However, there are several Pastafarian churches and organizations that have been granted religious status in some countries. For example, the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster was granted religious status in the Netherlands in 2016.

In the United States, the Flying Spaghetti Monster has been recognized as a religion for some purposes, such as allowing Pastafarians to wear colanders on their heads for driver's license photos. However, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not a recognized religion for all purposes, such as for tax exemptions.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster is a satirical religion, and its adherents do not necessarily believe in the literal existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. However, the Flying Spaghetti Monster has become a popular symbol of secularism and religious freedom. It is a way for people to challenge the idea that religion must be based on faith in a supernatural being.

me: What is a colander?

Bard: A colander is a kitchen utensil with a perforated bowl and a handle, used to drain cooked food or to rinse vegetables. They are typically made of metal, plastic, or silicone. Colanders are often used to drain pasta after it has been cooked. The cooked pasta is placed in the colander and the water is poured off. The colander can also be used to rinse vegetables. The vegetables are placed in the colander and cold water is poured over them. This helps to remove any dirt or pesticides that may be on the vegetables. Colanders are a versatile kitchen utensil that can be used for a variety of tasks. They are an essential tool for any cook.

me: So, Flying Spaghetti Monster followers are allowed to wear colanders on their heads in official government photos, like passports or driving licenses?

Bard: Yes, in some countries. In the United States, for example, there have been several cases where Pastafarians have been allowed to wear colanders on their heads in driver's license photos. In 2011, Niko Alm, a Pastafarian from Austria, became the first person in the world to be granted permission to wear a colander on his head in his driver's license photo.

In other countries, the situation is less clear-cut. In the United Kingdom, for example, the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) has stated that it will not allow people to wear colanders on their heads in driver's license photos. However, the DVLA has also stated that it will consider individual cases on a case-by-case basis.

Ultimately, whether or not Flying Spaghetti Monster followers are allowed to wear colanders on their heads in official government photos is a matter of local law. If you are a Pastafarian and you are considering wearing a colander on your head in an official government photo, it is important to check with the relevant authorities in your country to see if it is allowed.

Here are some of the countries where Flying Spaghetti Monster followers have been allowed to wear colanders on their heads in official government photos:

• Austria: Niko Alm, a Pastafarian from Austria, became the first person in the world to be granted permission to wear a colander on his head in his driver's license photo in 2011.
• United States: There have been several cases where Pastafarians have been allowed to wear colanders on their heads in driver's license photos in the United States.
• Canada: In 2016, a Pastafarian from Canada was allowed to wear a colander on his head in his passport photo.
• Netherlands: The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster was granted religious status in the Netherlands in 2016. This means that Pastafarians in the Netherlands are legally allowed to wear colanders on their heads in official government photos.

It is important to note that the situation may change in the future. As the Flying Spaghetti Monster becomes more widely known, it is possible that more countries will allow Pastafarians to wear colanders on their heads in official government photos.

me: Do they wear colanders on their heads in other situations?

Bard: Yes, some Pastafarians do wear colanders on their heads in other situations, such as at religious gatherings or when they are out in public. This is seen as a way to show their religious beliefs and to challenge the idea that religious headwear must be religious in nature.

However, it is important to note that not all Pastafarians wear colanders on their heads. Some Pastafarians do not believe that it is necessary to wear a colander on their head in order to be a Pastafarian. They believe that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is a tolerant and understanding deity, and that he would not judge them for not wearing a colander on their head.

Ultimately, whether or not a Pastafarian wears a colander on their head is a personal decision. There is no right or wrong answer, and it is up to each individual Pastafarian to decide what they believe is the best way to express their faith.

Here are some of the reasons why Pastafarians might choose to wear colanders on their heads in other situations:

• To show their religious beliefs.
• To challenge the idea that religious headwear must be religious in nature.
• To make a statement about secularism and religious freedom.
• To simply have fun and be creative.

It is important to note that wearing a colander on your head may not be allowed in all situations. For example, some schools and workplaces may have policies that prohibit the wearing of hats or head coverings. If you are considering wearing a colander on your head in a public place, it is important to check the local regulations to make sure that it is allowed.

RIP Edwina

Edwina Cleverbrain passed away last Saturday. She was around 9 or 10 years old. We miss our beautiful grey goat, also known as lady E or the fairest of the fairies (zana zanelor). She will be remembered for the rest of our days. After Edwina (and Devina, who has been gone for a number of years now), my children believe that all fairies are goat-like. After all, why should they look like humans? When James was little, and he'd see goat poop anywhere, James would say "caca zana zanelor".

I find it difficult to write about her departure since we loved her so very much. Mihai started this obituary. I am not sure I could have done it. Edwina had been the matriarch of our goat family. She leaves behind a family 10, which includes her three daugthers: Eva (3 years old), Edith (2 years old) and Emma (1 year old), and a kid, Emil, who is about one week old. Each of her daughters also have kids of their own. They are all male this year.

Everynone cried when Edwina died. We will miss you, Edwina! When you left, you took away a bit of our soul. Edwina was buried in the South China Sea, or at least that is Mihai's opinion of her final resting place. Although it brings little confort for now, her memory will stay with us fovever. Edwina is a caracter in our next book: Globe Waddling with Narcissus . My children imagine her as one of the fairies of the fields, who now spends her energy protecting the world.

What happened? When we were away, a neighbour fed the goats corn every two days. She is too old to feed them hay daily. When we returned for Easter the children and I moved the goats to another yard where they had some fresh grass. This seemed to have resulted in a deadly mix for Edwina, who was older, and perhaps had had a bit more corn than the others being a dominant goat. There was no autopsy. So, we will never know for sure if there was any added pathology beyond age and circumstances. It's a harsh reminder to not make sudden changes when one returns...

Emil has surrvived the past week with milk from Eva or Edith who are being held onto to feed him -- in addition to her own kids. Andy is dissapointed in their reluctance to help a fellow goat. However, Edward (my 12 year old) understands them: "Eva feels just like you would if you had to breastfeed Mihai." The reluctance is manifested in two ways: 1) all female goats run away when Emil gets close and 2) if they are force to feed him they struggle to get away or to bite him.

Even though our goats are very friendly, it is difficult to find anyone from the younger generation (under 50) to care for them when we are away. In addition to being great company, they are wonderful lawnmowers. Yet people perefer to cut the grass with electric or gas based mowers intead of interacting with goats. I still have a full time job in Spain. So, caring for them is a challenge.

Alexandru Bondarescu: the oldest survivor of the Titanic of the East

My father's favourite uncle was Alexandru. He was a mountain of a man who drove trucks and loaded them single-handedly with big barrels. This must have been fascinating for any young boy. He was also kind, and was known to like children. He raised a daughter that was not biologically his. She was born from his wife's first marriage and was a bit younger than my father, which made it fun to be around. My dad did not have many cousins and each was precious to him. Like all the Bondarescu men, Alexandru had big blue eyes, and dark blond hair. My father had brown hair and brown eyes. He took after my grandmother's side of the family (the Popa's), but the different hair colour did not make him love his uncle any less. When my parents married in 1975 they went to visit uncle Alexandru and he lifted my father and mother up -- each in one hand as if they were made of feathers. For many years to come my father tried to emulate him. I can still remember dad lifting Mihai, me and my mom when when we were children whenever we visited family to show his strength.

The Mogosoaia disaster happened on 10 September 1989. Alexandru and his family were returning from a wedding. Their life seemed settled. Their daughter was married and they were helping with the grandchildren. Everyone was there: his wife, Eugenia, his daugther, and his two grandchildren. Everyone who mattered to him was on that boat. It was foggy, unusualy cold for September and very crowded. The boat had been delayed because of the fog, and left only as it appeared to have lifted. Because of the weather most people were inside. About 230 people died, and only 16 survived. It was supposed to be a 30 minute ride: free for children under 12 -- children who did not make it alive with one exception.

The tragedy is comemorated by a clock in the village of Grindu that is stuck at 8:20 a.m., the hour of the crash at the destination that was never reached. When they had left the fog appeared to have lifted, but there was a pocket of fog around the corner called "Cotul Pisicii". The boat had its siren on to let other vehicles know of it's approach. Only it did not work. At 8:20 a.m. Mogosoaia struck a Bulgarian vesel called Petar Kaminchev that was carrying many tons of iron. It is said the Bulgarians tried to back up, but kept going forward because of inertia. Mogosoaia sunk in about 3 minutes.

At 65 Alexandru was still very healthy. He loved fresh air. He was a Danube man. The fog and the cold air did not disturb him much. The boat was overcrowded. So, he was outside to make more room for other people. Next to him was a man with a four year old child. In that split second just before the boat went under the man threw his son in the freezing Danube waters making him hold onto their empty wine barel brought to be filled by grandparents. He then ran back inside to get the rest of his family, and never made it. In that second Alexandru chose to live. He knew there was no chance to help by rushing back in. There was no time. The youngest and the oldest survivor of the crash reached safety. No other young children made it. Neither did Alexandru's wife Eugenia, who had been 55 years old, his daughter or his grandchildren.

There were 16 survivors in total. Some had to swim great lengths, others were close enough to just step-onto the Bulgarian vesel, and over 230 died: most passengers and crew. Even though traffic was stopped on that side of the Danube to enable the recovering of the bodies, not everyone was found and identified due to decomoposition. They recovered the boat, which sat around until it was dismantled in 2004. Alexandru said the Bulgarians were drunk, went too close to the shore, did not signal, and paid no atention to Mogosoaia's siren until it was too late. An investigation was launched, but not much was resolved. After the crash people remembered Alexandru sitting in a corner of the Bulgarian vesel, wringing his hands, crying uncontrolably and repeating over and over "Boys, what have you done? You killed them all, all." Once the bodies were gathered, all the priests of Galati came to perform the funerals. They would go from grave to grave in a form of daze. There was no time for flowers or towels or any of the traditions. Just grief. Everyone had lost somebody. Some bodies were recovered and some were never found. There was no significant remuneration. Many lost their whole family to the water.

Alexandru was a man who could share, and continued to share his life. After this tragedy, he did remarry to a respectable woman of comparable age. He retained a sadness that never quite left him and died a few short years later while thinking that the husband of his daughter never quite felt sorry enough nor did the Bulgarians. By the time I heard the story and remembered it, it must have been 1994. Almost 5 years had passed before I visited my grandparents in Galati. I was 12 years old and I was told the story of the disaster yet again. Being a (surely not annoying) teenager, I placed it further back in my mind with other family stories that did not seem worth repeating. However, today I think that my children, my nieces and nephews and especially of the little boy who shares Alexandru's name might like to know the story of their great uncle Alexandru. So, I put it up before I could forget.

Now all that is left from Mogosoaia is a clock at a fixed hour, and some books and articles that cronicle the disaster. Some survivors are still alive because they were young, including Eugen, the youngest boy. He has little memory of the crash due to his age, and the trauma and the loss of his parents, brother, sister, cousins, uncle and aunt. However, he is now a sailor and continues to brave the waters of the Danube in an attempt to build a life of his own. He remembers a man swimming next to him to keep him safe, and the person who pulled him out of the water, another sailor. Some people remember the only little boy who lived. But most have forgotten Alexandru.

Traiasca Romania!

Today we celebrate the creation of Romania from 1859. This union was achieved through diplomacy, not war. So, how did they do it? Well, the same leader was democratically elected twice, in two independent countries: Moldova and Tara Romaneasca. After reigning in both, Alexandru Ioan Cuza argued for the union with the powers to be explaining it took him two weeks to travel between his two capitals. It was approved and it lasted.

Romania increased in size in 1918 under the leadership of a woman, queen Maria. She beacame crown princess at the tender age of 16, and stole people's hearts and conquered their minds in a new country of which she did not even speak the language when she first arrived. Yet, she unified most nearby Romanian speakers in one big realm. In some ways, she was Romania's lady Diana -- only people back then were not quite so afraid of powerful women. It was assumed the wife supports the husband, and the husband supports the wife. The country and her husband supported her. She achieved great things including the creation of a new country that we still celebrate on December 1st of every year.

This was inspite of the times and yes, her marriage was marred by infidelity. She was the most beautiful queen of her time, and was loved and admired by many men, and she loved some of them in return. Ferdinand had his own affairs, but they respected each other in public and in private. He was taciturn. She was open and full of charisma. In our more modern world, in a period when we pretend to champion women's rights, Lady Diana was not allowed to thrive. She was instead kicked out of the royal family after an ignomious divorce with hers and his dirty laundry aired in a very public fashion. Today she is replaced her husband's lover - queen Camilla. Maria continued to lead until her husband died in 1927. She was replaced by her son, who blamed her for her infidelities, did not support her and did not welcome her advice. So, the leadership in the country collapsed. Romania owns less teritory now than it did in 1918. Both Maria's son and her grandson showed yet again that talent and leadership are not hereditary.

The grand Romania created by Maria, an immigrant who became queen, was bigger than the current state. Many territories conquered by Maria and her team through diplomacy were lost after WWII. Some became independent countries like Moldova and Transnistria (de la Nistru pana la Tisa/tot romanul plansu-mi-sa), and other parts where incorporated in other countries. Long disputed territories includes Insula Serpilor, which is now part of Ukraine.