Waching daily Oct 3 2018

Hey guys AB here from B&H.

Thanks again for watching.

if you haven't already subscribed, please make sure to do so.

Now today were talking about Sennheiser's Evolution Wireless G4 systems.

Which made their debut at NAMM 2018.

Since then, many of you have contacted us specifically about the portable G4 Wireless

systems.

Questioning whether you should purchase the G4 100 models or pay a bit more for the 500

series.

We think it would be best to highlight the key features that set these models apart.

Which will allow you to make the best choice for your specific wireless needs.

Let's start with a G4 100 series.

With this model, you get 42 MHz of switchable bandwidth.

Allowing for up to 20 compatible channels within the same set up.

You also got 30 mW of RF power.

The standard ME2 lavalier microphone, a clearer LCD display than previous generations and

up to 1680 tunable frequencies.

If you are a hobbyist, semi-pro or someone who just need a simple setup without lots

of transmitters and receivers, the 100 series should work great for you.

However, with the G4 500 series, you immediately jump into a more professional arena.

Giving you 88 MHz of switchable, bandwidth.

Allowing for up to 32 compatible channels within in the same setup.

You get 10/30 or 50 mW of RF power.

Giving you the option of using a higher output for applications such as filming at a distance.

Or, lower output for use in smaller, more confined spaces.

Of course, another advantage to being able to select a lower RF output is that you'll

extend your battery life.

And you get the MKE 2 lavalier microphone.

A higher-grade mic which by itself costs over $200 more than the ME2.

Giving you a better frequency response, lower self-noise in a more compact capsule.

And just for the record, I'm wearing the MKE 2 for this video.

You also get a balanced output.

A headphone output and phantom power for the plug on transmitter.

This is important because you'll be able to interface with condenser mics such as the

MKH 416 shotgun.

You also get 3520 tunable frequencies.

So clearly, if you require more demanding and or professional setup the 500 series may

be the way to go.

Whether you're in the market for a completely new wireless system, or you need additional

components that are backward compatible with previous Sennheiser Evolution wireless generations

like a very popular G3.

The new G4 series provides a lot of options from which to choose.

For more detailed info on the entire Evolution Wireless G4 line, visit bhphoto.com This is

AB, thanks for watching.

For more infomation >> Sennheiser G4 100 vs Sennheiser G4 500 | Which is Best for Me? - Duration: 2:46.

-------------------------------------------

Is California SCREWED? More Gun Control PASSED! - The Legal Brief - Duration: 6:23.

Welcome back to The Legal Brief, the show where we

CRUSH the various legal myths and misinformation surrounding various areas of the gun world.

I'm your host Adam Kraut and today sucks because I have to tell you about MORE gun control

laws that were just signed in California.

Before we get started I know how much you guys love the crush part of our opening.

We want to bring you guys in on the fun.

Send your best legal brief crush video to theguncollective@gmail.com for your chance

to be the featured crush on an episode.

If we pick it, we'll send you a sweet pack of gundamentalist stickers.

Get crushing or if you're lame head over to AdamKraut.com to grab yours.

Recently, we covered a bunch of new bills that were passed by the legislature in California

which were headed to the Governor's desk.

And as you would expect, Governor Brown signed five bills into law.

If it's any relief, he did veto three bills that the legislature had also passed.

Let's hit those first.

Governor Brown vetoed SB 221, which we previously called "The Bullsh*t Act" and would have banned

gun shows at the famous Cow Palace.

In his veto message, the Governor noted that this bill had been vetoed twice in the past

10 years, once by himself and once by former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger.

He went on to say that the decision of the kind of shows that occur at the Cow Palace

rests with the local board of directors, which is in the best position to make those decisions

because it represents a broad cross section of the community.

Also vetoed was SB1177, which we nicknamed "The Rationing of Firearms Act", and would

have limited firearm purchases to one every 30 days.

The Governor noted that he previously vetoed a similar bill in 2016 and his views hadn't

changed.

Lastly, AB 1903 was vetoed.

That's the bill which would have prohibited dispensing gift cards from gun sellers for

gun buyback programs.

The Governor stated that he understood the intent, but didn't believe those programs

needed to be micromanaged to that degree.

So, what did the Governor sign?

SB 1100 which we had titled the "You Must Be This Tall to Freedom Act" which prohibits

the sale or transfer of a firearm by a licensee to anyone under 21 years of age, with a few

exemptions.

Those include a valid hunting license issued by the state, law enforcement and members

of the military.

Apparently the legislature and governor of California feel that people like a 20 year

old single mother just doesn't have the right to defend herself and her children.

Also signed was AB 1968, which we called "It's Ok to Be Crazy Once, Crazy Twice Lose Your

Rights Act" which imposes a lifetime prohibition on anyone who has been taken into custody,

assessed, and admitted to a designated facility because he or she is a danger to himself,

herself, or others, as a result of a mental health disorder two or more times in any one

year period.

As we previously discussed there is a petition process to attempt to get your rights restored,

however, if the petition is denied, you have to wait 5 years before you can try again.

Then there are the three bills which we did not previously talk about.

Governor Brown also signed SB 1200, which amended California's Gun Violence Restraining

Orders or GVROs to include a ban on the possession of magazines.

It previously just covered firearms and ammunition.

In that same vein, he also signed AB 2526 which allows GVROs to be issued verbally by

Judicial Officers in certain circumstances.

So rather than just having to get stuff in writing, they can just tell you that you're

screwed.

Lastly, the Governor put pen to paper on AB 3129 and christened a new law that implements

a lifetime ban on firearm ownership by individuals convicted of any misdemeanor crime of domestic

violence.

You know...because Lautenberg Amendment hasn't been a thing since the mid 90's, which is

exactly the same thing.

Once again we see California continue to march steadily forward towards more gun control.

It almost seems that the state is enacting new laws for the sake of enacting new laws.

But hey, apparently there's no prize for having too few laws in place.

That's it for this episode, if you have learned anything from this show, help us out and hit

that like button, and share it with your friends.

Don't forget to get subscribed and if you enjoyed the video, consider supporting us

via the links down in the video description.

Be sure to check out the The Gun Collective Podcast on iTunes,

and as always, thanks for watching!

For more infomation >> Is California SCREWED? More Gun Control PASSED! - The Legal Brief - Duration: 6:23.

-------------------------------------------

Progress is an endless challenge - Duration: 0:31.

Progress is an endless challenge.

Here at the University of Wisconsin, we're a community of innovators in constant motion.

We think on our feet,

connect with each other

and hit our stride pushing past limits.

Progress is an endless challenge.

But it is only those up to the challenge

who change the game.

For more infomation >> Progress is an endless challenge - Duration: 0:31.

-------------------------------------------

GEOMETRIC PROOF THAT SQUARE ROOT 2 IS IRRATIONAL » Tennenbaum's proof | Math Hacks - Duration: 7:54.

Hey guys, what's up, I'm Brett and welcome back to math hacks. So a few weeks ago I demonstrated for you

through a proof by contradiction that the square root of 2 is irrational and

The proof that I showed you is the classic proof that you would find at the beginning of a real analysis course

Today I have a special treat for you

Because I am going to show you a lesser-known proof

But a really awesome proof of the same result. Now what makes this proof? So awesome is that is a

geometric proof

Which means that it is for a large part a proof by pictures and who doesn't love pictures. Let's get started

The square root 2 rationality proof I'm showing you today is

accredited to Stanley Tennenbaum an American mathematician from the 1950s and

The proof begins a lot like our classic proof I showed you before

We're still going to have a proof by contradiction

And we are still going to begin by stating that the square root of 2 is rational

This implies that we could set the square root of 2 equal to a ratio of two integers, so that is the second step

Just like in our classic proof we're going to go ahead and simplify down this statement

Our result here is similar to the result

we had in our previous proof we have that P squared is equal to 2q squared and instead of taking an

Algebraic look at this statement. We are going to take a geometric approach

So what this means geometrically is that I have a P by P integer square

Whose area is equal to 2

smaller Q by Q integer squares put together

So what I'm going to do next is just make a little diagram to represent these

Squares and from there we could take a look at how their areas are related

So here I have two Q by Q squares

set equal to one larger P by P Square and we know from our

Assumption up here that P and Q are integers

Positive integers. So all of these squares have positive lengths

our next step is to assume that this P by P Square is the smallest such integer by integer square we can make

this is similar to the

assumption we made in our previous proof about the

Smallest integers that we could reduce if you saw that proof, you'll know what I'm talking about

So I'm going to write down this assumption because this is a critical

Step to proving our contradiction

What I'm going to do next is take these two smaller Q by Q squares and

Place them inside of our larger P by P Square and it will result in an overlapping area

And what we have here is our two smaller cube IQ squares

Laid inside of our larger P by P Square and as you can see we get an overlapping area here in the middle

And make it two

gaps

Where the squares don't overlap our original p by p square, so

Because we know that the area of these two squares equals the area of the larger square now

I can say that the area of where they overlap

Must be equal to the area that is left uncovered from our original square

All right now here is where our contradiction is going to come in so because we know that P and

Q are integers

then I know that the

Length of my lightly shaded square must also be an integer by integer square

because it is the difference of the

P length

Minus the Q length and both P and Q are integers, and I know that an integer minus an integer

Yields an integer

And since I know that these two

Lightly shaded squares are integer by integer links

I can now deduce that the darkly shaded square is

also an integer by integer because if I look at these areas here, I see that the

side length of the dark square can be found by taking the entire length P which is an integer and

subtracting out a side length of this lightly colored square here and

the side length of this lightly colored square here and

we just

Deduced that those were integers as well

So we have an integer - an integer - an integer

So that means that this square - is an integer by integer square

this of course

Contradicts our assumption up here that our P by P

Square was the smallest such integer by integer square we could make of that type

so now that we have found our contradiction we can assume that our

Original assumption was false

and

Then state that

square root T must be irrational

So the final step is just to write that out in a words and that is what I'm going to do to conclude this proof

So I concluded by just writing out

that both the darkly shaded square and the lightly shaded squares have integer side links and

this contradicts the assumption that the P by P Square was the smallest such integer by integer square of

Sighs we could make their 4 square root 2 must be irrational

So I'm curious. Which proof did you like better?

Do you like Tennenbaums geometric proof of square root 2 irrationality, or do you prefer the proof I showed you a couple weeks ago

using the classic proof by contradiction approach

Let me know in the comments below

I'm really curious to find out and

As always there are two super easy things you can do to support the math hacks channel and keep more tutorials like this

Coming your way

1 click that subscribe button if you haven't already and join the math hacks community

And 2 give this video a big thumbs up to recommend it till next time. I'm Brett berry and thank you for joining me