text:
Finding A Great Fort Collins Air Conditioning Contractor Can Be Quick If You Know These Tipsvisit this web-site can not always trust an air and heating contractor when he claims to be dependable. A number of local contractors bilk their clients, often by finding approaches to increase the costs of labor and materials once a project is underway. Check out http://www.lennoxdealer.com/americanairheatingco/2-about.aspx before signing an agreement with the selected candidate, so that you're sure he's honest and dependable. Use these practical suggestions to help you find the perfect contractor.
Before you pick an air and heating contractor it's important to get references from people who've actually used their services so that you can make an informed decision about hiring them. A great indicator of the contractor's integrity is when you get several references. Your local ac repair contractor should also use products that are of a high-quality, otherwise the whole project might be compromised. After the work has been completed on your property speak with your contractor about what maintenance and care will ought to be done for the specific materials that have been used.
The very best way to address any issues you have with a licensed air and heating contractor is to find a quiet, private place where others can not see you. A private place to speak is really the easiest way to have open, candor filled meetings with your local contractor. Consider putting the work on hold until you've had an opportunity to resolve the problem. To address any issues that have happened, be sure to have a thorough contract preceding the beginning of work and carry that agreement with you.
Solving common heating problems - News - MetroWest Daily News, Framingham, MA - Framingham, MA
If you have a digital thermostat, check the batteries. Running out of juice means the thermostat will stop functioning. On analog versions, you can also check whether dust has collected inside the thermostat. Just remove the cover, which can be as simple as removing some screws, and carefully clean the internal components with a soft brush or compressed air. You can also check for loose wiring and tighten any connections. Solving common heating problems - News - MetroWest Daily News, Framingham, MA - Framingham, MA
The process of locating a great air and heating contractor needn't be rushed to ensure one gets the best. Getting referrals from your family or circle of friends is a great start. It may additionally be helpful to find opportunities to network with contractors where you may meet one that impresses you. Your success in hiring a qualified and good ac repair contractor greatly depends on the number of interviews you conduct.
American Air Heating and Air Conditioning
605 Coffman St, Longmont, CO 80501, USA
+1 303-774-7787
A low bid should not be dismissed on grounds that it will result in poor performance and should be considered when you are receiving bids. Examine https://www.pressherald.com/2017/09/28/heat-pumps-primer-homeowners/ with reference to the cost of the materials essential for the job. Labor costs is also one of the costs that should be taken into account. When the overall costs is within reason, never hesitate to have a legal contract.
In order to really ensure the success of all projects, communication needs to contain thorough expectations and a stable input. Whenever any problems arise, discuss things calmly and keep your mind open. When you speak often and clearly with your local air and heating contractor, you will not encounter problems in your relationship. Keep a detailed record of all the interactions you have with your local contractor in order to avoid legal problems farther down the road.


text:
Banfi Centine in 2006 and 2007, and since then I've frequently suggested the wine as an inexpensive but tasty Italian red that would work well with a wide range of Italian-American fare. While I'm always fond of the rich diversity of Italian food with so many unique ingredients and separate traditions, it's worth celebrating the fact that Italian cuisine branched off and formed a lot of new and delicious traditions here in the United States through the immigrant experience. Below, I'll provide the details for my chili mac that is pretty darned tasty as the weather is starting to get cold. A few days ago, I had to scrape a tiny layer of ice off my windshield for the first time this season, but today we were eating outside and eventually had to abandon the table because it was getting too warm, and the bees were out pollinating the trees that are still producing flowers in November. The joys of life in a hot climate.
Since it's still nice and warm, it's still time to enjoy a good rosé... hell, it's always time to drink pink. This is the rosato entry in the Centine line, and I was excited to open it up.
2012 Banfi Centine Rosé
Toscana IGT
Proprietary Blend of Sangiovese, Merlot and Cabernet Sauvignon
$11, 12.5% abv.
It's very bright rosé with a noticeable strawberry scent with a hint of lemon. It has a tart body with a crisp finish. The pale salmon color looks beautiful in the glass, and the wine has a remarkably long aftertaste of really ripe strawberries. I think it pair well with grilled chicken and asparagus drizzled in reduced balsamic vinegar, but I had other plans.
Cincinnati, and occasionally with a slice of bread. I tend to add red kidney beans whenever possible, and I recently made a big batch of chili with ground beef and kidney beans for freezing in convenient portions. It was great on its own, but a few weeks later I was able to defrost it and prepare a batch of chili mac.
I used organic rotini and didn't quite cook it al dente. I stopped early so that it was still slightly chewy and drained it thoroughly. The idea was to allow it to soak up the juices from the chili rather than letting excess water dilute the existing flavors. In order to not make too much pasta, I poured the dish half-full of dry pasta, dumped that in the water, and then cooked it in a pot. I combined the cooked pasta, some cottage cheese, about a litre of chile, and covered the baking dish with foil. I cooked it slow for about an hour, then added a layer of shredded cheese to brown on top.
With meat, pasta, and beans, it's incredibly filling, and even a small bowl is enough for an entire dinner. I was quite happy with it, and am still enjoying the leftovers days later. Obviously I'm adding a lot of hot sauce to my bowls, but I prepared the chili (and the casserole) mild to allow others to adjust their bowls as desired. Now, if only it would get a little colder.
Note: This wine was provided as a sample for review.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. – Larry says now is the time to plant your tomatoes! On Larry's Garden he offers a few pieces of advice.
First, start out with seeds. Larry says you can buy a tray and plant the seeds in pine soil. Larry says you can expect to have tomatoes in 70 to 90 days
A plastic top is great to protect them from frost, and Larry suggests putting the tray on the ground.
Tomatoes can also be grown in buckets and other containers, but plants will need at least 4 to 6 hours of sun, and 2 to 3 inches of water every week. Larry says the soil's pH has to be around 6.5.
Larry says good fertilizer insure a good crop Tomato Tome by Espoma will work but his favorite is Miracle Grow.
He says you have to make sure your plants have proper vitamins. Tomatoes can get Blossom Rot, which is a black spot on the bottom of the tomato, and is a sign that the plants need more calcium. Make sure you rotate crops every year to new location problematic with disease.
While we love tomatoes, Larry says bugs love them as well. There are natural ways you can keep them away, by using water and cayenne pepper or water and jalapeno peppers. Larry says Sevin's Dust also works well.
For more information about gardening or If you would like Larry to do your landscape log on to larrysgarden.com, o r give him a call at Larry's Garden Design & Installation at 904-346-1970.
You can hear Larry on the radio every Saturday morning at 7 a.m. on WOKV, it's AM 690 and 106.5 FM.


text:
Two months after he was named the new president of San Diego State University and before he even gets a chance to settle in as Stephen Weber's replacement, Elliot Hirshman finds himself smack in the middle of a compensation controversy.
The California State Board of Trustees is set to vote this week on whether to pay Hirshman $100,000 more per year than his predecessor.
If approved, Hirshman would earn $400,000 annually.
When you take into consideration that a recent study by the chancellor found Cal State presidents are underpaid compared to peers, receiving 52-percent of the pay of chief executives at similar institutions, the jump may seem reasonable.
However, timing is everything.
The vote on Tuesday comes the same day the board considers a 12% tuition hike for students.
Let us know what you think. Comment below, send us your thoughts via Twitter @PropZero or add your comment to our Facebook page.


text:
Study: Nearly Half of Soda Fountains Contaminated with Bacteria
According to the International Journal of Microbiology, biologists in Roanoke, Virginia, analyzed 30 different soda fountains (20 self-serve and 10 staff-dispensed) for microbial contaminants and found that nearly half of them contained coliform bacteria — with 11 percent containing E. coli and 17 percent C. meningosepticum. What's even scarier is that:
Most of the identified bacteria showed resistance to one or more of the 11 antibiotics tested. These findings suggest that soda fountain machines may harbor persistent communities of potentially pathogenic microorganisms which may contribute to episodic gastric distress in the general population and could pose a more significant health risk to immunocompromised individuals.
Yowza. I think I have even more reason to smuggle in a bottle of cola next time I go to the movies. [via Smithsonian Food & Think]
All products linked here have been independently selected by our editors. We may earn a commission on purchases, as described in our affiliate policy.


text:
The Weihai naval forces school located at the Liu Kung Island west end, is the Qing government after the Fuzhou ship politics school, the Tianjin naval forces school, the Guangdong amphibious school organizes fourth trains the naval officers the school. After the Beiyang navy forms an army, Li Hongzhang presents a memorial requesting in Liu Kung Island sets up the naval forces school, with the aim of nearby studying technologies and so on driving, torpedo, arms. This school began construction in 1889, to build house nearly 70, the area nearly 20,000 square meters. 1890 the year on June 3, the Weihai naval forces school completes and starts to teach, naval forces prefect Ding Ruchang holds a concurrent post of the school administrator, gets down supposes committee member, to raise adjusts, the total teacher, foreign language teacher each, Chinese written language teacher two, has agilely, Kang Ji, Weiyuan, the amusium japonicus four training ships. The start has English, the geometry, the algebra, driving and the naval gun drill procedure, the turbine, the astronomy, the geography, the swim under water. submerge and so on 30 in hall and the outfield topic. All rules and regulations, manage , the rewards and punishment and so on to press the Tianjin naval forces school regulation to handle. Because this school is situated in the Beiyang navy base prestige harbor, the navy facility may as student practice, the partial teachers also hold a concurrent post of by Beiyang navy's coach, the student while school study, may embark the practice actual operation, this merit is other naval forces school does not have.
The Weihai naval forces school only recruits session of students (total 46), because latter destroys Yu Jia noon the flames of war, the partial students change over to the Tianjin naval forces school to continue to study. Of but many a people of great ability and tremendous potential, student Wu Renli is Weihai the naval forces school graduation first, successively holds important post of Beiyang, the National government, lieutenant general the military rank, after new China was established, once was appointed Anhui Province committee member, the national committee member, People's Republic of China Central People's Government military board member . Luo Kaibang also successively holds National government war department vice minister, the proxy war department total length, lieutenant general the military rank. Moreover, Yang Jiao repairs, the Cui Fuwen, Li traditional in the navy service, is famous navy military officer .
Shandong, ancient place of for the Qi and Lu, located at the east China coast, the Yellow River downstream, the Beijing Hangzhou big canal's north section, the provincial capital supposes in Jinan, in the province the main super city has Jinan, Qingdao, Yantai, Zibo. Western connects the interior, with Hebei, Henan, Anhui, Jiangsu four provinces borders on separately from north to south; Middle high suddenly, Taishan is the throughout peak; The eastern Shandong Peninsula enters Yellow Sea, north separates the Bohai Sea channel and the Liaodong Peninsula relative, surrounds and protects Beijing and Tianjin and Persian Gulf, east separates Yellow Sea and the Korean Peninsula faces one another, the southeast is near depends on broad Yellow Sea, to look out south East China Sea and Japan the chain islands.


text:
Oil-free compressed air for Schwarzwald-Sprudel in Wildberg
Why Schwarzwald-Sprudel in Wildberg, Germany, has opted for ZD piston booster for their PET bottling line with energy recovery built-in
Industrial state-of-the-art oil-free air compressors 3,5 to 13 bar
Veolia Energy Poznań with Volkswagen Poznań have launched a joint project for industrial heat recovery. Energy, heat from industrial processes, is used to supply more than 30 buildings in the district Wilda, including the HCP hospital in Poznań.
Thanks to our oil free screw compressors, which are necessary in the foundry of Volkswagen Poznań, this very energy-intensive process (up to 80% of the electricity consumed by the compressor goes into heat energy) is transformed to power the municipal heating system.
With our global installed base, we can make 60 years of innovation and experience in oil-less air technology for you. No matter the conditions, our ZR and ZT produce certified oil-free air that protects all your critical processes and products. The difference? The ZR is water-cooled, the ZT is air-cooled. With pressure levels ranging from 3.5 up to 13 bar, we maximize your energy savings with a choice of rotary tooth or screw technologies.
A compact, all-in-one quality air solution
ZR and ZT rotary screw and tooth oil-free air compressors are available as Full Feature package with:
The ZR units are water-cooled & the ZT units are air-cooled.
Why Schwarzwald-Sprudel in Wildberg, Germany, has opted for ZD piston booster for their PET bottling line with energy recovery built-in
Cargill Turkey's Orhangazi Factory replaces fixed speed compressors with VSD and achieves up to 35% of energy savings
Lidergraf, a successful Portuguese graphic arts company, uses compressed air, blower and vacuum solutions to meet its demand for 100% oil-free, high-quality air to ensure the quality of its products.


text:
No. 22 Wisconsin beats Iowa 28-9
Badgers now bowl eligible for the 12th straight year
James White ran for 132 yards and a pair of late touchdowns as 22nd-ranked Wisconsin beat Iowa 28-9 on Saturday for its third straight win.
Joel Stave added two touchdown passes for the Badgers (6-2, 4-1 Big Ten), who are bowl eligible for the 12th year in a row.
Wisconsin's Pat Muldoon intercepted Iowa backup C.J. Beathard at the Hawkeyes 25-yard line with 7:43 left, setting up an 11-yard TD run by White.
White added a 2-yard touchdown with 1:35 left for the Badgers, who won despite a season-low 62 yards rushing from Melvin Gordon.
Hawkeyes quarterback Jake Rudock had 109 yards passing for the Hawkeyes (5-4, 2-3) before leaving the game in the third quarter with an apparent left leg injury.
In a game where field position and ball security was crucial, Iowa made its first huge mistake midway through the third quarter.
The Badgers made the Hawkeyes pay a play later.
Rudock threw a terrible ball into coverage that was picked off by Darius Hillary at the Iowa 20. Stave then found a wide-open Jared Abbrederis for a touchdown and a 14-6 lead - though Abbrederis would subsequently leave the game with a chest injury.
Iowa's Mike Meyer hit a 29-yard field goal that made it 14-9 heading into the fourth quarter.
Iowa was still within five when Beathard, in the first meaningful action of his career, threw a pass that bounced off the head of one of his linemen. Muldoon caught the deflection, and White essentially clinched the game three plays later.
Beathard had 70 yards on just 4 of 16 passing.
Iowa couldn't get much going on the ground either, even though Wisconsin linebacker Chris Borland was held out because of a strained hamstring.
Starters Mark Weisman and Damon Bullock combined for just 21 yards rushing.
The wind and a pair of strong rush defenses were major factors as both teams struggled to move the ball early.
The Badgers erased nearly two quarters of offensive futility with one big play.
An unpressured Stave found Jacob Pedersen alone near the Iowa's 5-yard line, and he strolled into the end zone for a 44-yard TD grab and a 7-6 Wisconsin lead with 1:49 left in the first half.
It was the first time Iowa had trailed at the break all season.
The Hawkeyes certainly had their chances, though.
Iowa twice got inside the Badgers 11-yard line - converting a key fourth down on each drive - but had to settle for field goals of 28 and 22 yards from Meyer.
Wisconsin's Jack Russell appeared to drill a 54-yard field goal with the wind at his back to end the half. But Iowa called three consecutive timeouts, and Russell ultimately missed short and right.
But field goals were all the Hawkeyes could muster as they fell for the third time in four games.


text:
Quantum Randomness
By Scott Aaronson
If there's no predeterminism in quantum mechanics, can it output numbers that truly have no pattern?
If there's no predeterminism in quantum mechanics, can it output numbers that truly have no pattern?
How can you know whether a sequence of numbers is random? Suppose, for example, that you buy an alleged random-number generator for use in creating cryptographic keys, and suppose the generator spits out something like:
84, 67, 33, 68, 81, 29, 83, 90, 26, . . .
The numbers look pretty random, but can you be confident that there's no hidden pattern—perhaps because of a backdoor secretly inserted by the manufacturer or some other privacy interloper?
So certifying randomness is both a philosophical problem and an urgently practical one. In the last issue's Technologue column, I discussed an abstract, conceptual solution to the problem of how to certify randomness, based on a seminal idea from the 1960s called Kolmogorov complexity. To recap, the Kolmogorov complexity of a string of bits is defined as the length of the shortest computer program that produces the string as output. In several ways that one can make precise, a string of n bits can be called "random for all practical purposes" if its Kolmogorov complexity is close to n. In such a case, the string is "algorithmically incompressible": The shortest computable description of it is the string itself.
Alas, although Kolmogorov complexity might lead to deep insights about the nature of randomness, there's a huge problem with applying it to real life. Namely, as I proved in the last issue, there's no algorithm to compute the Kolmogorov complexity of a given string! People sometimes try to get around this problem by approximating Kolmogorov complexity but it's not always effective.
If we really want to be sure that a sequence is random, we'll have to exploit some knowledge about how the numbers were generated: Did they come from die rolls? Radioactive decays? A computer program? Whichever physical process produced the numbers, what reasons do we have to believe the process was random?
At this point, the impatient reader might shout: If you want guaranteed randomness, why not just use quantum mechanics? After all, quantum mechanics famously says that you can't predict with certainty whether, say, a radioactive atom will decay within a specified time period, even given complete knowledge of the laws of physics as well as the atom's initial conditions. The best you can do is to calculate a probability.
But not so fast! There are two problems. Quantum-mechanical random number generators do exist and are sold commercially. But hardware calibration problems really can make the numbers predictable if they're not fixed. Furthermore, even if you couldn't predict the numbers better than chance, how could you be sure there wasn't some subtle regularity that would let someone else predict them?
The second problem is philosophical, and goes back to the beginning of quantum mechanics. It's well known that Einstein, in his later years, rejected quantum indeterminism, holding that "God does not play dice." It's not that Einstein thought quantum mechanics was wrong, he merely thought it was incomplete, needing to be supplemented by "hidden variables" to restore Newtonian determinism. Today, it's often said that Einstein lost this battle, that quantum indeterminism triumphed. But wait! Logically, how could Einstein's belief in a hidden determinism ever be disproven? Can you ever rule out the existence of a pattern, just because you'd failed to find one?
The answer to this question takes us to the heart of quantum mechanics, to the part that popular explanations usually mangle. Quantum mechanics wasn't the first theory to introduce randomness and probabilities into physics. Ironically, the real novelty of quantum mechanics was that it replaced probabilities—which are defined as nonnegative real numbers—by less intuitive quantities called amplitudes, which can be positive, negative, or even complex. To find the probability of some event happening (say, an atom decaying, or a photon hitting a screen), quantum mechanics says that you need to add the amplitudes for all the possible ways that it could happen, and then take the squared absolute value of the result. If an event has positive and negative amplitudes, they can cancel each other out, so the event never happens at all.
The key point is that the behavior of amplitudes seems to force probabilities to play a different role in quantum mechanics than they do in other physical theories. As long as a theory only involves probabilities, we can imagine that the probabilities merely reflect our ignorance, and that a "God's-eye view" of the precise coordinates of every subatomic particle would restore determinism. But quantum mechanics' amplitudes only turn into probabilities on being measured—and the specific way the transformation happens depends on which measurement an observer chooses to perform. That is, nature "cooks probabilities to order" for us in response to the measurement choice. That being so, how can we regard the probabilities as reflecting ignorance of a preexisting truth?
Well, maybe it's possible, and maybe not. The answer's not obvious, and wasn't until the 1960s—after Einstein had passed away—that the situation was finally clarified, by physicist John Bell. What Bell showed is that, yes, it's possible to say that the apparent randomness in quantum mechanics is due to some hidden determinism behind the scenes, such as "God's unknowable encyclopedia" listing everything that will ever happen. That bare possibility has no experimental consequences and can never be ruled out. On the other hand, if you also want the hidden deterministic variables to be local—that is, to obey the inherent impossibility of faster-than-light communication—then there's necessarily a conflict with the predictions of quantum mechanics for certain experiments. In the 1970s and 1980s, the requisite experiments were actually done—most convincingly by physicist Alain Aspect—and they vindicated quantum mechanics, while ruling out local hidden variable theories in the minds of most physicists.
To clarify, these experiments didn't rule out the possibility of any determinism underneath quantum mechanics; that's something that no experiment can do in principle. There's even a theory, Bohmian mechanics (named after physicist David Bohm), that reproduces all the predictions of quantum mechanics, by imagining that besides the amplitudes, there are also actual particles that move around in a deterministic way, guided by the amplitudes. Bohmian mechanics is extremely strange, because it involves instantaneous communication between faraway particles, though not of a kind that could actually be used to send messages faster than light. In essence, what Bell's theorem shows is that if you want a deterministic theory underpinning quantum mechanics, then it has to be strange in exactly the same way Bohmian mechanics is strange: It has to be "nonlocal," resorting to instantaneous communication to account for the results of certain measurements. In fact, understanding this aspect of Bohmian mechanics is what motivated Bell to prove his theorem in the first place.
I'd like to explain Bell's idea as a simple mathematical game (called the CHSH game, after its inventors, Clauser, Horne, Shimony, and Holt). This game involves two players, Alice and Bob, who are cooperating rather than competing. Alice and Bob can agree on a strategy in advance: There can be unlimited "classical correlation" between them. Once the game starts, however, no further communication is allowed. (We can imagine, if we like, that Alice stays on Earth while Bob travels to Mars.)
After they separate, Alice and Bob each open a sealed envelope, and find either a red or a blue card inside. The cards were chosen randomly, so that there are four equally likely possibilities: blue/blue, blue/red, red/blue, and red/red. After examining her card, Alice can raise either one or two fingers, and after examining his card, Bob can do likewise. Alice and Bob win the game if either both cards were red and they raised different numbers of fingers, or at least one card was blue and they raised the same number of fingers.
The question that interests us is, what is the best strategy for Alice and Bob—the one that lets them win this strange game with the maximum probability? As an exercise, I invite you to check that the best strategy is a rather boring one: Alice and Bob both just ignore their cards and raise one finger. Using this strategy, our heroes will win 75 percent of the time, whenever one or both cards are blue. The Bell inequality is simply the statement that no strategy does better than this.
On the other hand, suppose that before Alice and Bob separate, they put two electrons into a so-called Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen pair, a configuration where there's some amplitude for both electrons to be spinning left, and an equal amplitude for both electrons to be spinning right. This pair is the most famous example of an entangled state: Roughly speaking, a combined quantum state of several particles that can't be factored into states of the individual particles. (For our purposes, it doesn't matter what it means for an electron to be "spinning left or right," it's just some property of the electron.) Then, when they separate, Alice takes one electron and Bob takes the other.
In this case, Bell showed that there's a clever strategy where Alice and Bob use measurements of their respective electrons to correlate their responses—in such a way that no matter which cards they get, they win the game 85.4 percent of the time. Because 85.4 percent is more than 75 percent, there can be no way to describe the state of Alice's electron separately from the state of Bob's electron—if there were, then Alice and Bob couldn't have won more than 75 percent of the time. To explain their success in the game, you need to accept that no matter how far apart Alice and Bob are, their electrons remain quantum mechanically entangled. (See the figure on the first page and table above.)
Before going further, it's worth clarifying two crucial points. First, entanglement is often described in popular books as "spooky action at a distance": If you measure an electron on Earth and find that it's spinning left, then somehow, the counterpart electron in the Andromeda galaxy "knows" to be spinning left as well! However, a theorem in quantum mechanics—appropriately called the No-Communication Theorem—says that there's no way for Alice to use this effect to send a message to Bob faster than light. Intuitively, this is because Alice doesn't get to choose whether her electron will be spinning left or right when she measures it. As an analogy, by picking up a copy of American Scientist in New York, you can "instantaneously learn" the contents of a different copy of American Scientist in San Francisco, but it would be strange to call that faster-than-light communication! (Although this might come as a letdown to some science fiction fans, it's really a relief: If you could use entanglement to communicate faster than light, then quantum mechanics would flat-out contradict Einstein's special theory of relativity.)
However, the analogy with classical correlation raises an obvious question. If entangled particles are really no "spookier" than a pair of identical magazines, then what's the big deal about entanglement anyway? Why can't we suppose that, just before the two electrons separated, they said to each other "hey, if anyone asks, let's both be spinning left"? This, indeed, is essentially the question Einstein posed—and the Bell inequality provides the answer. Namely, if the two electrons had simply "agreed in advance" on how to spin, then Alice and Bob could not have used them to boost their success in the CHSH game. That Alice and Bob could do this shows that entanglement must be more than just correlation between two random variables.
To summarize, the Bell inequality paints a picture of our universe as weirdly intermediate between local and nonlocal. Using entangled particles, Alice and Bob can do something that would have required faster-than-light communication, had you tried to simulate what was going on using classical physics. But once you accept quantum mechanics, you can describe what's going on without any recourse to faster-than-light influences.
Bell's theorem can also be understood in another way: as using the assumption of no faster-than-light communication to address the even more basic question of predictability and randomness. It's probably easiest to explain this idea via an example.
In 2002, Stephen Wolfram published his 1,200-page book A New Kind of Science, which set out to explain the entire universe in terms of computer programs called cellular automata. You can think of a cellular automaton as a giant array of 0s and 1s that get updated in time by a simple, local, deterministic rule. For example, "if you're a 0, then change to 1 only if three of your eight neighbors are 1s; if you're a 1, then stay 1 only if either two or three of your eight neighbors are 1s." (This rule defines Conway's Game of Life, one of the most popular cellular automata, invented by mathematician John Conway in 1970.)
Despite their almost childish simplicity, cellular automata can produce incredibly complex behavior (see the figure above), such as "particles" and other structures that travel across the array, collide, merge, and disintegrate, and sometimes even seem to act like living organisms. Witnessing this behavior, generations of programming hobbyists have speculated that our own universe might be a cellular automaton at its base, a speculation that Wolfram embraces with gusto.
Personally, I have no problem with the general idea of describing nature as a simple computation—in some sense, I'd say, that's the entire program of science! When I read Wolfram's book, however, I had difficulties with the specific kind of computation he asserted could do the job. In particular, Wolfram insisted that the known phenomena of physics could be reproduced using a classical cellular automaton: that is, one where the bits defining "the state of the universe" are all either definitely 0 or definitely 1, and where the apparent randomness of quantum mechanics arises solely from our own ignorance about the bits. Wolfram knew that such a model would imply that quantum mechanics was only approximate, so that (for example) quantum computers could never work. However, it seemed to me that Wolfram's idea was ruled out on much simpler grounds, namely Bell's theorem. That is, because a classical cellular automaton would allow only correlation, rather than quantum entanglement, it would lead us to predict wrongly that the CHSH game can be won at most 75 percent of the time.
Wolfram had a further complication up his sleeve, however. Noticing the difficulty with explaining entanglement, he added a conjecture that, when two particles become entangled, a "long-range thread" forms in the cellular automaton, connecting two locations that would otherwise be far apart. Crucially, these long-range threads would not be usable for sending messages faster than light, or for picking out a "preferred frame of reference"; Wolfram knew that he didn't want to violate special relativity. Rather, in some way that Wolfram never explained, the threads would only be useful for reproducing certain predictions of quantum mechanics, such as the one that the CHSH game can be won 85.4 percent of the time.
It turned out that the idea was still unworkable. In a 2002 review of Wolfram's book, I proved that the long-range thread idea can't possibly do what Wolfram wanted. More precisely, I showed that if a long-range thread can be used to win the CHSH game more than 75 percent of the time, then that thread also picks out a preferred frame of reference, or (worse yet) creates closed timelike curves, where time loops back on itself, which would allow Alice and Bob to send messages to their own pasts. (Note that Bohmian mechanics doesn't contradict this theorem, because it does pick a preferred frame of reference. But such a frame—that is, something that tells you whether Alice or Bob made their measurement "first"—is what Wolfram had been trying to avoid.)
At the time I wrote down this observation, I didn't think much of it, because the argument was just a small variation on ones that Bell and the CHSH game creators had made decades earlier. In 2006, however, the observation attracted widespread attention, when John Conway (the same one from Conway's Game of Life) and Simon Kochen presented a sharpened and more general version, under the memorable name "The Free Will Theorem." Conway and Kochen phrased their conclusion as follows: "if indeed there exist any experimenters with a modicum of free will, then elementary particles must have their own share of this valuable commodity." To put it differently: Assuming no preferred reference frames or closed timelike curves, if Alice and Bob have genuine "freedom" in deciding how to measure entangled particles, then the particles must also have "freedom" in deciding how to respond to the measurements.
Unfortunately, Conway and Kochen's use of the term "free will" generated a lot of avoidable confusion. For the record, what they meant by "free will" has almost nothing to do with what philosophers mean by it, and certainly nothing to do with human agency. A better name for the Free Will Theorem might've been the "Freshly-Generated Randomness Theorem." For if you want to understand what the theorem says, you might as well imagine that Alice and Bob are dice-throwing robots rather than humans, and that the "free will of the elementary particles" just means quantum indeterminacy. The theorem then says:
Suppose you agree that the observed behavior of two entangled particles is as quantum mechanics predicts (and as experiment confirms); that there's no preferred frame of reference telling you whether Alice or Bob measures "first" (and no closed timelike curves); and finally, that Alice and Bob can both decide "freely" how to measure their respective particles after they're separated (i.e., that their choices of measurements aren't determined by the prior state of the universe). Then the outcomes of their measurements also can't be determined by the prior state of the universe.
Although the assumption that Alice and Bob can "measure freely" might seem strong, all it amounts to in essence is that there's no "cosmic conspiracy" that predetermined how they were going to measure. At least one distinguished physicist, the Nobel laureate Gerard 't Hooft, has actually advocated such a cosmic conspiracy as a way of escaping the implications of Bell's theorem. To my mind, however, such a conspiracy is no better than believing in a God who planted fossils in the ground to confound paleontologists.
So now that we know something about Bell's theorem, and the inherent randomness of quantum measurement outcomes, what are the implications for our original subject—how to generate numbers that are guaranteed to be random? You might think that the problem is now solved! After all, Bell's theorem reassures us that quantum measurement outcomes really are unpredictable, just as quantum mechanics always claimed they were.
Well, not so fast. There's still the problem that you might not believe that some particular quantum random-number generator is free of hardware problems that introduce subtle biases. Or you might even worry about more bizarre possibilities, such as that nature delivers true random numbers "when it needs to" (as in the specific case of the CHSH game) but reverts back to determinism for other quantum experiments.
For both reasons, a natural idea would be to use Alice and Bob's outputs in the CHSH game themselves as a source of random numbers. After all, if we find Alice and Bob winning the CHSH game 85.4 percent of the time, despite being far away from each other, then we become authorized to make an extremely strong statement: "Either Alice and Bob's outputs had genuine unpredictability to them, or else the causal structure of spacetime itself is nothing like what we thought it was."
Crucially, nowhere in this statement do we need to assume the correct functioning of Alice and Bob's hardware, or even the truth of quantum mechanics itself. Yes, both of those assumptions are relevant to explaining why Alice and Bob can win the CHSH game 85.4 percent of the time. However, once a skeptic sees that they are winning the game with the requisite probability, that fact (plus the causal structure of spacetime) is all the skeptic needs to know. There's nothing further about physics that needs to be accepted on faith.
However, when we think more about this idea of using the CHSH game as a random number source, a new difficulty crops up. Namely, for Alice and Bob to play the CHSH game in the first place, they need inputs (the colors of their respective cards), and those inputs are already supposed to be random! So to get randomness out, we need to put randomness in, and it's not clear that there's ever any net benefit.
Maybe there's a way to modify the game, so that we get out more randomness than we have to put in. If so, then even if we had to start with a small random "seed," there could still be an immense gain as we use CHSH to grow our seed into a much larger number of random bits.
The question of whether this sort of "quantum-certified randomness expansion" is possible was firrst asked by Roger Colbeck, in his 2006 Ph.D. thesis. Along with Adrian Kent, Colbeck gave a protocol that used a CHSH-like game to increase the number of random bits available by a fixed percentage. For example, starting with 100 random bits, the scheme could produce 130 or so as output, whereas starting with 1,000, it could produce 1,300. Then, in a 2010 Nature paper, Stefano Pironio of the Free University of Belgium and his colleagues did better, showing how to use CHSH to expand an n -bit random starting seed into about n2 bits of random output. How far could this go? In 2012, Umesh Vazirani and Thomas Vidick showed for the first time how to achieve exponential randomness expansion, using only about n bits of random input to get 2n bits of random output.
The central idea in all of these protocols is simply to be stingy with the use of randomness. We ask Alice and Bob to play the CHSH game over and over again. However, in almost all of the plays, they simply both receive red cards—leading to a boring but also "cheap" (in terms of randomness) game. Only for a few randomly chosen plays does one of them receive a blue card. However, if, say Alice receives a red card, she has no idea whether this is one of the rare plays that "counts" and is one where Bob received a blue card, and vice versa. So, not knowing which plays they're being "tested on," Alice and Bob have no choice but to play the game correctly, and therefore generate random bits, for almost all of the plays. The cleverer you are at sticking in the "spot checks," the more randomness expansion you can get.
For technical reasons, the protocol of Vazirani and Vidick couldn't provide more than exponential expansion. But, frustratingly, there was no proof that even greater expansion wasn't possible. Indeed, no one could rule out the amazing possibility of so-called infinite expansion: Starting from a fixed random seed (say of 1,000 bits), we could use Alice and Bob to get as many more random bits as we wanted, with no limit whatsoever. There was even an intuitive argument that suggested that infinite expansion should be possible; why not reinvest the randomness? That is, after running the Vazirani-Vidick protocol to turn n random bits into 2n bits, why not use the 2n bits to get 22n bits, and so on forever?
The difficulty comes down to a simple question: The output bits might be random, but to whom? They may look random to you, or to any third party (say, an eavesdropper), but not to Alice and Bob, because they generated the bits. So for example, suppose you were foolhardy enough to use those 2n bits as the seed for a second run of the Vazirani-Vidick protocol—greedily asking Alice and Bob, like the mythical Rumpelstiltskin, to spin them into 22n random bits. In that case, Alice and Bob could quickly figure out that your new "random challenges" were deterministically generated by the seed that they themselves had given you in the last round. So from that point forward, Alice and Bob could cheat, giving you bits that were almost entirely deterministic, and using randomness only to pass your occasional, predictable challenges. Maybe there's a way to confuse Alice and Bob and force them to spin more randomness, but no one has figured it out yet.
In the meantime, a simple fix is to bring in additional players. Suppose we have not only Alice and Bob, but also Charlie, Diane, Edith, and Frank. In that case, we can use Alice and Bob to spin n random input bits into 2n random output bits (random to everyone else, though not to Alice and Bob), then use Charlie and Diane to spin Alice and Bob's 2n bits into 22n random bits, then use Edith and Frank to spin 22n bits into 222n bits, and so on. However, an obvious problem with this approach is that the more random bits we want, the more players we need.
If we want infinite randomness expansion with a fixed number of players, then we also need a "randomness-laundering scheme," a way of taking random bits that are "dirty" (correlated with the players' knowledge in some complicated way), and converting them into random bits that are "clean" (uncorrelated with at least some players' knowledge). Crucially, such a randomness-laundering scheme would need to work even though Alice, Bob, and anyone we might use to execute the scheme might try to cheat, and keep the randomness "dirty" (that is, predictable to at least some of them).
Fortunately, it turns out that the CHSH game is a multipurpose tool: It also lets us launder randomness! That this ability is possible emerged from a seemingly unrelated 2012 breakthrough by Ben Reichardt, Falk Unger, and Umesh Vazirani. They proved a "rigidity theorem" for the CHSH game, showing that, if Alice and Bob play many instances of the game and win about 85.4 percent of them, then they must be measuring their entangled particles in a way that's nearly "isomorphic" to the procedure shown in the figure on the first page. Even if we allow unlimited quantum entanglement, there's no fundamentally different strategy that does as well at the CHSH game.
In 2013, MIT graduate students Matt Coudron and Henry Yuen put all the pieces together. First, by using Reichardt, Unger, and Vazirani's rigidity theorem, they showed how to design a randomness laundering protocol which uses the two players Alice and Bob, takes n "dirty" random bits as input, and produces n c "clean" random bits as output, where c is some small positive constant (say, 1/10). The "dirty" bits could be correlated with anything except Alice and Bob themselves, whereas the "clean" bits are guaranteed to be uncorrelated with anything except Alice and Bob themselves. Notice that, just like a real laundry machine, the protocol actually shrinks the number of random bits every time it runs—the exact opposite of what we wanted! However, this polynomial shrinkage will be dwarfed by the exponential expansion provided by the Vazirani-Vidick protocol, so ultimately it won't matter.
Coudron and Yuen's final protocol (illustrated above) involves six players who perform alternating rounds of expanding and laundering. First Alice and Bob expand the original n -bit random seed into 2n dirty random bits. Next Charlie and Diane launder the 2n dirty bits to get 2cn clean bits. Then, having been laundered, these 2cn clean bits are ready for Alice and Bob to expand again, into 22cn dirty bits. Then Edith and Frank launder these 22cn dirty bits into 2c2cn clean bits, which Alice and Bob expand, and so on forever. We need two laundromats, working in alternate shifts, to clean the bits for the other players, so no one sees the same "dirty" bits twice.
Earlier this year, a simpler approach to infinite randomness expansion emerged from work by Carl Miller, Yaoyun Shi, Kai-Min Chung, and Xiaodi Wu. The new approach bypasses the need for Reichardt, Unger, and Vazirani's rigidity theorem, and requires only four players rather than Coudron and Yuen's six. It's still not known whether infinite randomness expansion is possible using just two or three players. Also unknown, at present, is the exact number of random seed bits needed to jump-start this unending process: Do 1,000 seed bits suffice? 100? (In general, the answer will depend somewhat on just how statistically certain we want to be that the output bits are random.)
How can we know for sure if something is random? In this two-part series, I've tried to cover a century's worth of thought about that question. We've seen statistical randomness tests, Kolmogorov complexity, Bell's theorem, the CHSH game, the "Free Will Theorem," and finally, recent protocols for generating what's been called "Einstein-certified randomness." Starting with a small random seed, these protocols use quantum entanglement to generate as many additional bits as you want that are guaranteed to be random—unless nature resorted to faster-than-light communication to bias the bits.
Pironio's group has already done a small, proof-of-concept demonstration of their randomness expansion protocol, using it to generate about 40 "guaranteed random bits." Making this technology useful will require, above all, improving the bit rate (that is, the number of random bits generated per second). But the difficulties seem surmountable, and researchers at the National Institute of Standards and Technology are currently working on them. So it's likely that before too long, we will be able to have copious bits whose randomness is guaranteed by the causal structure of spacetime itself, should we want that. And as mentioned before, for cryptographic purposes it can matter a lot whether your randomness is really random.
Although there is a need for randomness, we normally don't need huge amounts of it. Even for cryptographic applications, our computers rely heavily on pseudorandom number generators: Deterministic functions that start with a small random seed and stretch it out into a long string that "looks random for all practical purposes." To clarify, the output is certainly not completely random, because the number of possible seeds is so much tinier than the number of possible long strings. However, according to current understanding in theoretical computer science, even if the seed was only a few thousand bits long, and the output was thousands of terabytes, telling the output apart from a truly random string could require astronomical amounts of computation. Indeed, even if the entire observable universe were converted into supercomputers working on telling the output from random, those supercomputers would probably have degenerated into black holes and radiation before they'd made a dent in the problem. Assuming that's true, it would seem fair to say that the pseudorandom string is "random- looking enough," and that the only true randomness we needed was that in the initial seed. When it comes to randomness, then, a little can go a long way—but you do need a little to get things started.
Click "American Scientist" to access home page


text:
Across the Board was a travelling exhibition from the British Museum. It featured board games of all types from around the world including Go, Chess, Chinese Chess, Tables, Senet, Ludo, Mancala, Snakes and Ladders, and Monopoly and others.
Stars of the exhibition were some of the famous 12th century walrus ivory Lewis Chessmen and the 11th century Tables (Backgammon) set from Gloucester.
Across the Board visited:
The Go set displayed was described as a "Chinese Wei Chi (Go) board and pots with black and white shell and stone pieces. Early 20th Century". It had a grey board with black lines set in a wooden surround that was decorated with mother of pearl inlay of plants and butterflies, and featuring drawers for the peices. The thick stones and wooden bowls were of the usual Japanese pattern.


text:
Life givers us so many challenges that we have to face, and sometimes it stalls the creative flow with other things needing to be done - appointments & driving time, caring & listening time, cooking & cleaning time - getting older, can all be challenges in themselves. When there is a lull, I want a challenge of a different kind to kickstart my creativity and journey to peace and wholeness!
I found a head I had made ages ago, that has been picked up and rejected as not suiting a project I had in mind, but couldn't get going on. Bits of the whole thing are lying around - a leg here an arm there and an unspeakable body! The head I had even used as a cushion to demonstrate a needle felting technique to someone! Bits of fluff were embedded in it and it looked used and abused - not in it's pristine condition as this first pic.
Late last night I picked it up as I had the urge to make a face. I started needle sculpting - wish I had thought to take pics then! I was trying for an open mouth - it looked ghastly - I undid it, and re-sculpted the mouth. When I did the eyes, I though this is not going to work - but I stitched on regardless -trying for laughing eyes.
When I started colouring it, I thought I'd ruined it completely and it took a wee while to get the eyes right. The addition of freckles distracted from other marks I had made on the face and eyelashes set it off!
Prior to this, I had been watching Anne of Green Gables and was surprised at the look of this face - how it had turned out! (Because I never have a preconceived idea!)
I decided Tow hair was needed to set it off, so made some wefts. The straw hat with flowers made it quite a different head to the one I was challenged with last night! Might have to think of a body now!
So from nothing much, to something with potential! Is that like lifes challenges?


text: The Environmental Mapping and Analysis Program (EnMAP) is a German hyperspectral satellite mission that aims at monitoring and characterising the Earth's environment on a global scale. EnMAP serves to measure and model key dynamic processes of the Earth's ecosystems by extracting geochemical, biochemical and biophysical parameters, which provide information on the status and evolution of various terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems. More information about the main objectives and the status of the EnMAP mission can be found here.


text: The Gonzo Inn located in Moab UT is like an Oasis in the Desert. It is designed with your comfort and fun in mind. It is perfect for enjoying all the activities Moab has to offer including mountain bike riding on the Slick Rock Trail, hiking in Arches or Canyonlands National Parks, rock climbing, or rafting on the Colorado River.


text:
Coconut cream cake
Nutrition and extra info
- Can be frozen when uniced
- Egg-free
- kcal411
- fat23g
- saturates17g
- carbs50g
- sugars30g
- fibre2g
- protein4g
- salt0.58g
For the cake
- juice of 1 lemon
Oval in shape with a pronouced bulge on one end, lemons are one of the most versatile…
- 50g desiccated coconut
- 200ml carton coconut cream
- 85g fine or medium polenta
An Italian storecupboard staple, polenta has its roots in the peasant cuisine of northern Italy…
- 2 level tsp baking powder
Baking powderbay-king pow-dah
Baking powder is a raising agent that is commonly used in cake-making. It is made from an alkali…
- 140g butter at room temperature
Butter is a dairy product made from separating whole milk or cream into fat and…
- 140g golden caster sugar
- finely grated zest of ½ lemon
Oval in shape with a pronouced bulge on one end, lemons are one of the most versatile…
- 140g plain flour
- 2 tbsp toasted desiccated coconut
- 140g icing sugar, sieved
Heat the oven to 180C/gas 4/fan oven 160C. Line an 18cm round cake tin with baking parchment. Cream together the butter and sugar until soft. Add 150ml/1⁄4pint of the coconut cream and the remaining cake ingredients and beat lightly to make a soft and slightly wet mixture.
Spoon the ingredients into the tin and bake for 50-55 minutes, until the top of the cake is golden and a skewer inserted comes clean. Remove from the oven allow to cool in the cake tin.
When cold, remove the cake from the tin, peel away the paper and put the cake on a plate. Put the icing sugar into a bowl and add enough of the reserved coconut cream to mix to a thick but flowing consistency. Spread the icing over the cake, allowing it to dribble down the sides, then sprinkle the toasted coconut around the top edge.


text:
(Reuters) - Jefferies Group Inc (JEF.N) is selling itself to Leucadia National Corp LUK.N, its biggest shareholder, in a deal aimed at reassuring investors it has access to long-term funding.
Leucadia, which models itself on Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway (BRKa.N) and owns companies ranging from real estate to mining, is paying $2.76 billion in stock for the 71 percent stake of Jefferies it does not own.
The deal is the latest sign that Wall Street firms are scurrying to answer investor questions about their funding and long-term profitability in the wake of new rules and regulations.
Leucadia had previously purchased one million shares of Jefferies in November 2011 to calm market fears about the firm's viability during the European banking crisis and in the aftermath of the bankruptcy of MF Global.
The plan announced Monday values the combined company at $3.6 billion. Jefferies shareholders will receive 0.81 of a Leucadia share, valuing their stock at $17.66 per share, a premium of 24 percent to its Friday closing price of $14.27.
Jefferies shares were up 13.1 percent to $16.41 in late afternoon trading on the New York Stock Exchange. Leucadia was off 3.7 percent at $20.90.
Jefferies will become Leucadia's biggest holding and provide it with a new management team. Jefferies Chief Executive Richard Handler, who is 51, will take the reins of the combined company from Leucadia Chairman and CEO Ian Cumming, who is 71. Leucadia President Joe Steinberg, 68 will become chairman when Cumming retires in January. <For more on Leucadia, click on ID:nL1E8MC2JU>
"This will allow us to play offense at Jefferies," Handler said on a conference call with investors. "It will allow Leucadia a way to invest its excess liquidity."
Leucadia has $4.4 billion of tax benefits from losses at some operating companies that it rarely uses but that Jefferies can exploit because it consistently generates more taxable income that its new parent, Jefferies executives said.
The ability to use the tax benefits more rapidly is "the only real synergy that we can see from the transaction," Chris Kotowski, an analyst at Oppenheimer wrote to clients. Jefferies, he added, was "motivated by a desire never again to have its business and funding subject to the whims of the public equity markets, as it appears to have been last November."
Coming on the heels of Stifel Financial Corp's (SF.N) announcement last week that it is buying niche investment bank KBW Inc KBW.N, the deal underscores the sensitivities of investment banks to loss of market confidence and access to capital during times of stress.
Larger Wall Street firms such as Goldman Sachs Group (GS.N) and Morgan Stanley (GS.N) must constrain risk-taking activities and hold more capital in reserve for potential losses because they became bank holding companies during the financial crisis.
Smaller firms such as Jefferies escaped the brunt of new financial reform regulation and were hoping to take advantage of the retreat by larger rivals to grow. It ran into problems, however, when some investors questioned its viability last year during the Euro-banking and MF Global crises.
Last month, Moody's Investors Service downgraded Jefferies to a notch above junk status, saying its growth has added to its risk. Moody's on Monday affirmed Jefferies' ratings but put the junk-rated Leucadia on review for possible upgrade.
Since 2008, Jefferies has added more than 2,000 employees. The company has not offered any retention bonuses to its almost 4,000 employees and does not expect any layoffs as a result of the merger, Handler said on the call.
Restricted stock bonuses will be paid in Leucadia shares, with no changes in vesting schedules, he said.
The new access to Leucadia's balance sheet should offset questions from investors and employees about further growth potential, he said.
"Having avoided the complexity and burden of its bank holding company competitors, Jefferies is uniquely positioned as a global investment banking firm," Handler told investors on Monday.
Jefferies was founded in 1962 in Los Angeles to trade large stock orders for investors away from the New York Stock Exchange. It evolved from a so-called third market firm when Handler—-who earlier traded junk bonds under Drexel Burnham Lambert's Michael Milken—-joined in 1990 to build its bond trading prowess.
In recent years it has supplemented its bond trading and fixed-income products such as junk bond funds with more stable fee-based businesses such as offering mergers advice and raising money for aerospace, consumer energy, and telecom companies.
The bank, now based in New York and Connecticut, has been trying to turn itself into a full-service investment bank, but its balance sheet has held it back, particularly in areas like trading. On the other hand, it said that it will now be able to funnel investment ideas that it cannot handle itself to its new parent.
In August, Jefferies led the bailout of Knight Capital Group KCG.N with a $125 million investment, and now owns 45 percent of Knight's shares. It could have purchased even more of Knight and given less to competitors if it had been fully owned at the time by Leucadia, Jefferies executives said on the call.
Leucadia said it will convert from paying an annual dividend to the quarterly schedule currently used by Jefferies, allowing the bank to bolster its balance sheet and fund its trading and investments.
The deal, expected to close during the first quarter of 2013, will leave Jefferies shareholders owning about 35 percent of Leucadia's common stock.
With Leucadia's 29 percent of shares and another 11 percent held by Handler and Jefferies President Brian Friedman, shareholder approval is all but guaranteed and competitive outside bids are "highly unlikely," JMP Securities analyst David Trone wrote in a note to clients.
Jefferies' own bankers, along with JPMorgan Chase and the law firm Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, negotiated the deal, which is expected to close in the first quarter of 2013. Leucadia's banking adviser was Rothschild Inc. and Weil, Gotshal & Manges was its legal adviser. UBS and Proskauer Rose provided advice to Leucadia's board.
Reporting By Jed Horowitz, Jessica Toonkel and David Henry; Editing by Alden Bentley


text:
Southern Florida Swamp Snake
Scientific name: Seminatrix pygaea cyclas (DOWLING 1950)
* Currently accepted name
* scientific names used through time
- Contia pygaea – COPE 1871
- Tropidonotus pygaeus – BOULENGER 1893
- Seminatrix pygaea – DOWLING 1950
- Seminatrix pygaea cyclas – DOWLING 1950
Description: Average adult size is 10-15 inches (25-38 cm), record is 18.5 inches (47 cm). Adults are shiny and black. The belly is red with black edges. It has 117 or fewer belly scales. The scales on the back are smooth and there are 17 dorsal scale rows at midbody. The pupil is round. Juvenile coloration is similar to adults.
A. Top of the head
B. Smooth scales
C. Elongated scales below the tail (subcaudal scales) are typically divided
D. Front (face view) of the head
E. Side of the head
Range: In Florida, the Southern Florida Swamp Snake occurs from the central peninsula south to the tip of Florida; it does not occur in the Florida Keys. It is not found outside of Florida.
Habitat: Commonly found in a variety of aquatic enivironments such as cypress swamps, marshes, prairies, lakes, ponds, slow moving streams and rivers, willow heads, hyacinth-choked canals, and estuaries.
Comments: HARMLESS (Non-Venomous). The Southern Florida Swamp Snake is aquatic and prefers to inhabit areas with dense vegetation where it burrows into sphagnum moss, and bottom and floating vegetation. It is rarely encountered away from water, but sometimes can be found under logs or debris near water, in crayfish burrows, or crossing roads during rain.
Comparison with other species: The Northern Florida Swamp Snake (Seminatrix pygaea pygaea) has more than 117 ventral scales with a black line at their base extending 1/3 the distance from the edge to the center. The Redbelly Snake (Storeria occipitomaculata) is grayish-brown with a light colored neck. The Mud Snake (Farancia abacura) has lateral pinkish-red bands or bars and a black and red checkerboard patterned belly.


text:
Estimating from ticket stubs, I've gone to 3-5 Bruins games per year dating to my late-'90s college days. I won't this season.
Sports fandom and introspection don't mix well. The poignancy quickly evaporates in, say, Ray Lewis' last dance in front of Baltimore Ravens fans. Just becomes a guy — with a dark criminal history — making a spectacle of himself, right down to throwing around a prop chunk of real grass.
There are days I open the closet, look through the two dozen jerseys in it and grab one to wear. There are other days I close it and head toward the collared shirts. Thirty-two's a little old to be going outside in your pajamas.
And it's a little old to just race back, wallet open, to a league that thinks you're a sucker.
As someone lucky enough to consider sports his vocation, the ancillary garbage drains the passion a little more each day. The saving grace? Always the games. I do not remember the pregame shows. The orchestrated arguments. The carefully crafted soliloquies.
I remember Kirk Gibson's home run in the '88 World Series selling me on baseball forever. Watching the awful 1991 Patriots upset Warren Moon's Houston Oilers from bad seats I'd won in a newspaper contest. The yellowing Red Sox highlight reel, right down to David Ortiz slugging a walkoff at the annual Couture family game a couple years back.
The games make the flaws tolerable. Every league takes it fans for granted, cashes in during good times, leans on loyalty during the bad. The NHL is not unique in that business.
They're just unique in, repeatedly, not being able to simply play the damn games. And so, you can have them.
I'm sitting this one out.
Note I didn't say hockey, because it never went anywhere. Wife went to a P-Bruins game just Sunday. On top of a couple Boston trips to see some of the nation's best college teams, we spent a free Tuesday last month making the four-hour round trip to Yale. (Ingalls Rink and the highly regarded Bulldogs were worth the drive. And yes, I married well.)
Estimating from ticket stubs, I've gone to 3-5 Bruins games per year dating to my late-'90s college days. Usually stewarding a small group of family and friends. Sometimes paying to park. Almost always ponying up for nachos and a beverage.
I won't this season. And even understanding what sports mean around here, I can't fathom why so many others will.
How much more are you willing to pitch into their $3.3 billion pool before demanding a little respect?
That's what the NHL made in hockey-related revenues last year: a record $3.3 billion, up — per the Wall Street Journal — at least 50 percent since 2005. This is the not the fiscally skewed league that gassed the 2004-05 season, but the one that came out of that with the "cost certainty" (a.k.a. salary cap) they'd fought a decade for.
And know what? It was worth it. The league's flourished. National broadcast TV deal. Parity. A system that allowed Atlanta, a two-time NHL loser, to be replaced by Winnipeg, which already might offer the best arena experience in the league and the sort of place the league simply priced out in the expansion-happy '90s.
Couldn't keep the doors open, though. Three. Point. Three. Billion. Not half of what baseball makes in a year, but enough to keep everyone happy, dressed and fed. But let's say one side felt like it had to renegotiate increases in the players' share of the pie they'd bargained all of "� the last time they'd bargained. Mature adults certainly could get that squared away during an offseason, yes?
No. Instead, it's been four months of your owner, Jeremy Jacobs, leading the parade of unprintables from his seat atop the NHL Board of Governors.
I've no desire to rehash it all. I'd wager you know enough of Jacobs' sniping, same as you know of his using the Stanley Cup parade two years ago — a Cup win that completely reshaped his legacy for the better — as a chance to jab Cam Neely about never winning a Cup as a player.
That legacy's ruined forever now. Yet here we sit, so many consumers just glad they're back. Missives from fans whose idea of showing Jacobs their anger involves a cussword on a snuck-in posterboard or a well-timed boo from their Garden seats.
Go buy a beer from him while you're at it. You've earned it.
Can't say I'm surprised, though. The first season after the previous lockout, NHL attendance actually went up more than two percent. Bruins numbers were up three times that, and that was for a basement-dwelling team.
There's something to be said for loyalty. But this kind of loyalty enabled this lockout. The parties involved could quibble over billions, trashing more than 600 games while shuffling relative pennies, because you're an addict. And you don't want help.
I've read the stories of why we should forgive, and solicited more from others. I am glad for those who make a living off the league and its teams, the only real victims here. If I planned on watching, I'd probably appreciate the shortened schedule will make the regular season more exciting.
And in all honesty, I wish I could let it go. I remember 1995, so happy that baseball was back I snuck a small radio into school to listen to the Sox weekday opener. Couldn't fathom people walking away from the game, turned off by the greed.
I get it now.
At the risk of overstating it, we've become a world where just griping about something has taken the place of doing something. Where a Facebook 'like' is considered action. I'm not naive enough to think keeping my credit card in my pocket for the foreseeable future will change anything tangible.
But among America's big four sports, none is as reliant on fan-derived revenue — tickets, concessions, parking, etc. — as the NHL. (Forty-seven percent of league revenues, says Forbes. The NFL's is just 24 percent.) In no place will the pushback be felt stronger.
And don't think it's a coincidence that following the fan response to baseball post-1994, MLB hasn't lost a game to a work stoppage since.
People like Ed Snider know that. Speaking to Philadelphia's NBC affiliate after the tentative agreement was reached, the Flyers chairman offered the first of what should be a litany of apologies to the NHL's congregation.
"If any of the fans are thinking of not coming back," he said, "please understand that nobody wanted this."
You got that right, Ed. Thing is, though, most of us didn't have a say in the matter.
At least until now.
Contact Jon Couture at firstname.lastname@example.com


text:
M219 - Black (Dark Orange M)
This unique and meticulous design exclusive to MOVEMENT HEADWEAR & APPAREL coupled with the impeccable quality of FLEXFIT bring forth The Bold M219 – Black - Curved Peak Fitted Cap:
- Maintains comfort and shape
- Unique & subtle design
- Style & quality
- Geared for both active and casual lifestyles
Curved Peak Fitted Cap
Size: One Size Fits All (OSFA)
Materials Used: 83% Acrylic - 15% Wool - 2% Spandex
Wash Care: Hand Wash Only
Returns, Refunds & Exchange Policy
If you're not entirely satisfied with your product, we're here to help.
- You have 10 calendar days to return the item from the date you received it.
- To be eligible for a return, your item must be unused and in the same condition that you received it.
- Your item needs to have the receipt OR proof of purchase
- Once we receive your item it will be inspected immediately. You will then be notified on the status of your refund
- If approved, we will initiate a refund to your Credit Card OR original method of payment. You will receive the credit within 10 days (depending on your card issuer's policies)
- You have 10 calendar days to exchange the item from the date you received it
- To be eligible for an exchange, your item must be unused and in the same condition that you received it
- Your item needs to have to the receipt OR proof of purchase
- You are responsible for the shipping cost to return your item.
- Shipping cost are non-refundable
Contact US:
If you have any further questions on how to return, obtain a refund or exchange your item, please feel free to contact us.
Color: Black


text:
On your next trip to Southern Sonora, don't waste time by waiting around for stuffy buses and expensive taxi cabs. Instead, book your Sports rentals in Southern Sonora today here on Expedia.com and independently explore the area at your leisure. This way, whether you're in town for business or pleasure, you'll have a convenient means to travel to any meetings or conferences as well as Southern Sonora's must-see attractions.
Find Southern Sonora Sports Rentals
Cheap Southern Sonora Sports Rental Deals
When reserving a Southern Sonora Sports rental, you have a myriad of options. Simply enter your preferences into our online search wizard and we will compile a list of vehicles best matching your travel and stylistic needs. And when you rent Sports cars in Southern Sonora here on Expedia.com, you can book confidently knowing you have received the best possible price. We always present you with the best deals and discounts on your rental car, resulting in the lowest rates around. So no matter if you are in need of Sports cars for rent in Southern Sonora for just a few days or something longer term, we have got you covered. Go ahead and start browsing our affordable rental car options today and book the vehicle that is right for you.
Sports Car Pickup Locations in Southern Sonora
- Next
- Page 1 of 3
- Showing Results 1-5 of 12
Hertz: Carr Cd Obregon Navojoa Km 18.4, Cuidad Obregon, MEX
Europcar: Ciudad Obregón International Airport (CEN), Carretera Ciudad Obregón-Navojoa KM18.40, 85000 Ciudad Obregón, Sonora, Mexico
Location: In Airport
Pickup Method: Shuttle to Pickup
Sixt: Miguel Aleman 828N, Ciudad Obregon, MEX
Green Motion: Aeropuerto Internacional de Cd. Obregon, Ciudad Obregon, MEX
Sixt: Carretera Internacional, km 15, Ciudad Obregon, MEX
- Next
- Page 1 of 3
- Showing Results 1-5 of 12


text:
Harvest Journal: Where's The Magic?
Before I came to Napa, wine was a job and a passion, something tasty and sometimes transcendent. I would talk with friends and coworkers about great wine and winemakers like they are magicians, transforming fruit into a beverage that is much greater than the sum of its parts. The winemaker as artist, the winemaker as genius.
I'm starting to believe that winemaker as workhorse is a more appropriate comparison.
A month in, I now have an idea of my typical workday as a lab intern:
7 a.m. Arrive at the winery.
7:05 Make sure I have coffee. 'Cause I'm going to need it.
7:10 to 10:30 Fermentation checks and associated paperwork (there are now so many barrels fermenting that I cannot remember all of the lots, and they take up much more of my time).
10:30 to 10:40 Take a break, if the checks don't take even longer than the time I have allotted.
10:40 to 1:00 p.m. Lab analysis of grape samples from the vineyards, finished fermentations, and other assorted goodies that show up.
1:00 to 1:30 Lunch.
1:30 to 4:00 Yeast inoculations, more lab analysis, make coffee.
4:00 to 7:00 Fermentation checks. Again.
7:00 to 7:30 Clean up.
And then home, where I eat and sleep and am in bed by 10 in order to get up and do it again.
What's not entirely clear from this outline is the physical, repetitive nature of the work. At the very least, I am standing for 12 hours a day. Some things, like inoculations and returning samples to tanks, can involve going up and down stairs and ladders carrying many gallons of juice for an hour or more. People working in the cellar and vineyards have an even more intensive physical job, and the bosses are as busy and messy as the rest of us. It's just a lot of labor, and there's very little sign of art.
We follow a series of known steps to encourage the yeast to convert sugar to alcohol to make wine. There are decisions to be made (native or inoculated yeast? tank or barrel fermented? new or used oak barrels?) and when nature throws a curveball, winemakers do have to make the tough choices (Overripe grapes! Do we add water, acid? Just let it ferment and end up with a high-alcohol behemoth?).
Working alongside the winemakers and oenologists to implement these choices has demystified wine for me and added to my understanding of it, but perhaps too much. We are simply encouraging a process that would occur without us. If we don't mess it up, the product gets to your table and hopefully offers some pleasure at the very least.
But is this art? Is this magic? What, in these mostly pre-determined actions, leads to a great wine?
Right now, I don't know. Art is in the palate of the beholder, and I'm not sure if I will ever be able to taste it again.
About the Author: Sarah Chappell is a winemonger and writer living in
Brooklyn Napa. She holds the Advanced Certificate with Distinction from the Wine and Spirit Education Trust and has contributed to Foodista, Palate Press and WineChap. Follow her on Twitter @chapsholic.
More Harvest Journal
Arriving in Napa
The First Ferments
The Mess We're In
All products linked here have been independently selected by our editors. We may earn a commission on purchases, as described in our affiliate policy.


text:
Basic Info
Model NO.: MG1060000000
Processing Type: Shaping Metal
Mould: Multistep Progressive Dies
Process: Forming Process
Tolerances: 0.02mm
OEM/ODM: Available/Welcome
Trademark: metaltec
Specification: SGS \ ISO9001
Type: Cold Stamping
Material: Berybllium Bronze
Fine Blanking: Multi-Position
Industry: Auto Accessories
Customized: Customized
Certificate: SGS / ISO9001:2015
Transport Package: as Per Customers′ Requirement
Origin: China
Production Description
we are professional in developing, manufacturing& stamping, we are Indirect manufacturer of BOSH, AMP INCORPORATED, Rosenberger, BULL, etc.
|Product Detail
|Company inform
|Production No.
|Main products
|Stamping parts, stamping mould, plastic parts, plastic mould
|motor accessories
|Available material
|Carbon Steel & Stainless Steel available
|Beryllium bronze, Brass
|Production capacity
|stamping: 20-30 million pcs/month
Mould: 50-80 sets / month
|certificates of products
|as customer's required
|Free sample
|application of products
|Auto, electrical, water treatment,computer, etc…
1) Are you a factory or trade company?
We are manufacture, so we can offer you the competitive price and fast lead time. Welcome to visit out factory.
2) Whether some samples can be provided?
Yes. Samples can provided. Just need some sample cost and we'll return it back when proceed into mass production.
3) Will my drawing be safe after you get it?
Yes. We will not release your design to the third party unless with your permission.
4) How to deal with the parts received when they are found to be in poor quality?
Please rest assured that all our products are QC inspected and accepted with inspection report before delivery and generally there will no non-conformance; in case of non-conformance, please contact us immediately, take some pictures, we will check on the problems and have them reworked or repaired at the first time. The resulting transportation costs are borne by our company.
1. Quick quotation according to technical drawing
2. Professional in developing ,manufacturing & stamping
3. Provide the sample for your reference
4. High quality with competitive price
5. Work safety control and precision testing
Please send your inquiry details with DRAWINGS.


text:
On raising a son on the autism spectrum, progressive politics, pop culture, and coffee addiction.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
Autism awareness begins at home
I know that this is a campaign that makes some eyes roll - Is this really activism? In what way is it really spreading meaningful awareness or making a tangible difference in the lives of people with autism? Isn't it just a campaign that makes people feel like they're doing something good, without actually prompting them to do something good?
Last year, I engaged in some dialogues about the relative merit of the campaign. This year, though, our blue light feels a lot more personal than political. And I'll tell you why.
Bud knows he has autism. A couple of years ago, as I was preparing an autism presentation for his classmates, my mind kept coming back to the disability rights philosophy "Nothing about us without us." I knew that it would not be helpful to Bud or to his classmates for him to be part of the presentation, and yet, I also knew that it was not fair to give them information about him that he didn't have about himself. I'd never hesitated to use the word "autism" in front of him, but I'd also never talked to him directly about it.
And so, before I met with his classmates, I sat down to talk with Bud about autism. As you might imagine, Bud's not an analogy kind of guy, so I steered clear of any mention of toasters or hairdryers. Instead, I tried to keep my explanation clear, direct, and on point. I told him that people have brains that work in different ways, and that the way his brain works has a name: autism. I told him that autism makes some things harder for him than they are for other kids, and it makes some things easier for him than for other kids. He acknowledged that he'd heard me - I think he said "oh" - but he didn't seem particularly interested.
"Can you think of some things that are really, really hard for you, Bud?" I asked.
And without missing a beat, he responded, "Change is hard."
"That's exactly right, Bud," I said. "Change IS hard, and sometimes it's a lot harder for you than it is for other kids. And that's because of autism."
"Oh," he said again.
"And can you think of some things that are really easy for you?" I asked.
"Computers," he answered.
"That's right, " I said. "Computers are easier for you than for other kids because of your brain's autism. And you know how you can say all the words to TV shows?"
"Most other kids can't do that."
"They CAN'T?"
"Nope. But it's easy for you because of autism."
"Oh. Cool."
Bud asked if I had autism, too, and I explained that I didn't. We talked about other people we know who don't have autism and other people we know who do. And that was about that. Bud's world was not rocked, but he did have a new word to carry with him.
From that point on, I'd bring it up from time to time. If he was struggling with something, I'd help him take a step back by explaining that it was his autism that made it difficult for him. Once, when we were at the mall, we heard a child making loud but cheerful vocalizations that were echoing through the aisles.
"Why does she keep doing that?" Bud asked.
"She likes to do that, Bud," I answered. "You know how you like to say the words from Teletubbies?"
"You like to do that because of your autism. Well, she has something that makes her like to make that noise. It might be autism or it might be something else. Everyone is different."
"Oh," he said. And then, his sensory integration rattled because of the interplay between the other child's reverberating cheerful vocalizations and his own autism, he added "Let's get out of here." And we did, as I chalked one up for emerging self-advocacy skills.
A short time later, Claire Hughes-Lynch's wonderful book came in the mail. Bud, always hopeful that any package delivered to the house will include a surprise for him, asked what was inside.
"It's a book, Bud. It's for me."
"What's the book's name is?" he asked.
"It's called Children With High Functioning Autism."
Bud gasped. "Like ME???"
"Yes! Just like you," I said, as he skipped away, delighted to be the sort of person that people write books about.
So, over time, "autism" became a familiar concept around our house - though, to be honest, Bud sometimes has a hard time remembering the word itself ("What is it, again?"). And so, last year seemed like the right time to introduce the concept of Autism Awareness, through the lens of the Light It Up Blue campaign.
I explained it to Bud this way: People all over the world would light blue light bulbs on the same day, so that everywhere people went, they would see blue light bulbs, and the blue light bulbs would keep reminding them of the same thing: People with autism are important.
A few days before April 2nd last year, we went together to Home Depot to pick up a bulb. "Remember, Bud?" I said. "We'll light up this blue light bulb to remind everyone who sees it that people with autism are important."
And then, it was April 2nd, and as night fell, I went outside to take out our old light bulb so we could light the house up blue. It was dark enough that the bulb cast an impressive glow, and I called Bud over to see it.
He stood at the front door, pressed his face against the glass, and stared with wonder no less profound than it would have been if he'd been looking at the northern lights or at a sky filled with the flashes of a meteor shower.
I crouched down next to him and stared out the window at our blue-tinged front yard.
"Remember Bud?" I said. "Remember what the blue light means?"
"What?" he asked.
I prompted him with the words we'd been using for weeks. "The blue light reminds everyone who sees it that people with autism are..."
And as he stared out into the blue, he answered softly in a voice that came from a million miles away: "Awesome."
So, yeah. We'll be lighting it up blue again this year.
To remind everyone who sees it that people with autism are important.
And, more importantly, to remind Bud that people with autism are awesome.
26 comments:
- Unknown said...
I keep trying to figure out a good way to try to explain my sons Autism to him and the blue light might be a good conversation starter. How old was Bud when you talked to him about it. I see so much of Bud in my son, your blog always brings a smile to my face or a thought to my brain. Thanks
- March 28, 2012 7:35 PM
- MOM-NOS said...
Thanks, Mark! Bud was in fourth grade when we first talked about it.
- March 28, 2012 7:37 PM
- Karen Isaacson said...
going to buy my blue bulb tomorrow in honor of awesomeness. xoxo
- March 28, 2012 9:20 PM
Maybe that's why they call it "awe"tism. :)
- March 28, 2012 11:47 PM
- Unknown said...
What a wonderful post - I am going to share it on my Facebook!
Like you, I talk about autism all the time in front of my daughter but I've never talked to her about it. She is 8 but not aware at all that she is different from other kids. She goes to a special school where there are autistic kids, kids with cognitive impairments and kids with downs' syndrome. She already knows that many kids are different than her. Her best friend in school "doesn't talk so good" as she puts it. But I think she doesn't have any idea that she is different too. I don't know when the right time to talk to her about it is. I keep waiting to see signs that she notices that she is different but I don't see that.
Anyway when it is time, I will take a cue from you, because I think the way you described it to Bud is wonderful.
I'll be thinking of you and Bud when we light it up blue too.
- March 29, 2012 3:06 AM
- Kim said...
wonderful post! I love how you approached talking to Bud about autism and I adore his take on it. You are both right.
- March 29, 2012 8:49 AM
- gail said...
This blessed me. I have been told to not talk about having autism with my granddaughter, age 6, because she has not brought it up yet. I'm not so sure...
- March 29, 2012 1:21 PM
- Dixie Redmond said...
And now when I see a blue bulb I will think "awesome". Maybe it's Awesome Awareness Day?
- March 29, 2012 5:15 PM
I have an eight year old son, and has been wondering the appropriate time and conversation to have with him. Your blog gave me some good ideas. Thank you.
- March 29, 2012 5:57 PM
- Helena Sue said...
Haha... Bud IS awesome!
- April 01, 2012 8:13 AM
This was a wonderful story. These high functioning kids are way too smart to not tell them what Autism is. My sixteen year old says that he feels sorry for other kids who don't have Autism, that he's the lucky one!
- April 01, 2012 10:43 AM
- Kelly said...
I had a startlingly similar conversation with my 8 year old who overheard me use the word on the phone (all our family is out of state). He took in stride and I thought it didn't matter much to him. Weeks later he got sent to the principal for "making a bad choice." She called me amazed that in their discussion he told her, "I have aspergers, you know." I love how he cuts through and shows me clarity all the time.
- April 01, 2012 10:48 AM
I wish I could put a good spin on the blue campaign, but I just can't do it. If anyone were to see my blue light, then they would think it is ok with me if they donate to AS. And AS would take that money and pay people crazy amounts of money for their jobs, use it for parties in Aspen and private jets. They take it and have a walk in a town and go back to NYC with the money and never give it back to that community. They would take that money and NEVER CURE or find ways to prevent autism, because then they wouldn't have jobs! I think it's incredibly sad that it is that way, but it is. :(
- April 01, 2012 11:15 AM
- Joanne said...
Thank you for your beautiful words.
- April 01, 2012 11:20 AM
- Unknown said...
That is a great read! My son also has autism he is only 3, didn't really know how to explain it to his brother and sisters, thanks to you I do! Thank you
- April 01, 2012 11:21 AM
Your explanation on why we light it up blue was such a great one. I would like to share your post on my FB page if it's ok with you. I think it would bring so much awareness to so many people who don't know why we do this. I looked on your blog to see if there was a share button for me to click but was unsuccessful.
- April 01, 2012 12:54 PM
- MOM-NOS said...
Perfectly okay, Priscilla. You can share the link from my Facebook page. And thank you!
- April 01, 2012 1:01 PM
- Patty O. said...
Thank you, thank you, thank you! I have tried to talk with my son about autism, but never seemed to get the words right. I love how you have conducted your dialogue with your son and plan on copying you! This is great. And I LOVE what your son said. He's right: people with autism are awesome!
- April 01, 2012 2:25 PM
- Jessica said...
Thank you for sharing this important step & private moments with us. My son is three, and I have already been thinking about how that talk will go with him. This will be our first year lighting it up blue because we want the whole world to know that people with autism are VERY AWESOME!
- April 01, 2012 2:50 PM
Thank you so much for Sharing this!! I have a hard time myself wondering when the right time to tell my son he has autism is! I feel it is very important for him to know instead of him knowing he feels different yet not able to put together what it is!I will also find that book like today! Love to you and Bud....from me and tommy xo
- April 01, 2012 3:53 PM
- Meredith said...
Bud IS awesome, just like all of our kids. If any of you parents are looking for a book to help you discuss autism with your ASD kids, may I humbly recommend "Ben Has Autism, Ben Is Awesome" - available at jasonandnordic.com. Reviews at http://notanaffliction.blogspot.com/p/my-book-coming-very-soon.html
- April 02, 2012 11:55 AM
- KAL said...
I love how clearly you explained it to him. True awesomeness.
- April 03, 2012 11:42 AM
- J. Drewes said...
This is a great posting straight from the heart. Alot of people believe that Autism Awareness Day has gotten too political over the last couple of years. Our company, Bilinguals Inc. / Achieve Beyond pediatric therapy & Autism services, support this day because Autism Speaks has lobbied to get many laws passed in favor of children with autism and makes the whole country more aware of the impact autism is having around the world. We are glad that you continue to support the day and help continue to build awareness for Autism.
- April 20, 2012 12:19 PM
- Daisy said...
Amigo finally reached a point where he can say "I have an excellent memory" and know that he's unusual in a very good way. In his case, it came about when his teachers recruited him for Forensics. Talk about a confidence builder!
- May 03, 2012 8:55 PM
- megan said...
Completely agree, it all begins at home
- July 25, 2012 8:45 PM
- eberry5003 said...
Fantastic. Awesome. Kudos. A big bow to you mom. I often wonder how much progress the autism community might make if more parents were...well, like you! Bless you. And Bud.
- September 02, 2012 9:55 PM