text:
Laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma
Jung Hwan Ji, Joon Seong Park, Chang Moo Kang, Dong Sup Yoon, Woo Jung Yoon
Purpose: The aim of this study was to verify that laparoscopic resection for treating retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma (NL) is expected to be favorable for complete resection of tumor with technical feasibility and safety. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 47 operations for retroperitoneal neurogenic tumor at Yonsei University College of Medicine, Severance Hospital and Gangnam Severance Hospital between January 2005 and September 2015. After excluding 21 patients, the remaining 26 were divided into 2 groups: those who underwent open surgery (OS) and those who underwent laparoscopic surgery (LS). We compared clinicopathological features between the 2 groups. Results: There was no significant difference in operation time, estimated blood loss, transfusion, complication, recurrence, or follow-up period between 2 groups. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LS group versus the OS group (OS vs. LS, 7.00 ± 3.43 days vs. 4.50 ± 2.16 days; P = 0.031). Conclusion: We suggest that laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign NL is feasible and safe by obtaining complete resection of the tumor. LS for treating retroperitoneal benign NL could be useful with appropriate laparoscopic technique and proper patient selection.
Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research
https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2017.92.3.149
Published - 2017 Mar
Patient Selection
Ji, J. H., Park, J. S., Kang, C. M., Yoon, D. S., & Yoon, W. J. (2017). Laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma. Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research, 92(3), 149-155. https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2017.92.3.149
Ji, Jung Hwan ; Park, Joon Seong ; Kang, Chang Moo ; Yoon, Dong Sup ; Yoon, Woo Jung. / Laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma. In: Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research. 2017 ; Vol. 92, No. 3. pp. 149-155.
@article{1ed727d7629a42bfa548a57e0614377f,
title = "Laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma",
abstract = "Purpose: The aim of this study was to verify that laparoscopic resection for treating retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma (NL) is expected to be favorable for complete resection of tumor with technical feasibility and safety. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 47 operations for retroperitoneal neurogenic tumor at Yonsei University College of Medicine, Severance Hospital and Gangnam Severance Hospital between January 2005 and September 2015. After excluding 21 patients, the remaining 26 were divided into 2 groups: those who underwent open surgery (OS) and those who underwent laparoscopic surgery (LS). We compared clinicopathological features between the 2 groups. Results: There was no significant difference in operation time, estimated blood loss, transfusion, complication, recurrence, or follow-up period between 2 groups. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LS group versus the OS group (OS vs. LS, 7.00 ± 3.43 days vs. 4.50 ± 2.16 days; P = 0.031). Conclusion: We suggest that laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign NL is feasible and safe by obtaining complete resection of the tumor. LS for treating retroperitoneal benign NL could be useful with appropriate laparoscopic technique and proper patient selection.",
author = "Ji, {Jung Hwan} and Park, {Joon Seong} and Kang, {Chang Moo} and Yoon, {Dong Sup} and Yoon, {Woo Jung}",
doi = "10.4174/astr.2017.92.3.149",
journal = "Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research",
publisher = "Korean Surgical Society",
Ji, JH, Park, JS, Kang, CM, Yoon, DS & Yoon, WJ 2017, 'Laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma', Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research, vol. 92, no. 3, pp. 149-155. https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2017.92.3.149
Laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma. / Ji, Jung Hwan; Park, Joon Seong; Kang, Chang Moo; Yoon, Dong Sup; Yoon, Woo Jung.
In: Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research, Vol. 92, No. 3, 03.2017, p. 149-155.
T1 - Laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma
AU - Ji, Jung Hwan
AU - Park, Joon Seong
AU - Kang, Chang Moo
AU - Yoon, Dong Sup
AU - Yoon, Woo Jung
N2 - Purpose: The aim of this study was to verify that laparoscopic resection for treating retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma (NL) is expected to be favorable for complete resection of tumor with technical feasibility and safety. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 47 operations for retroperitoneal neurogenic tumor at Yonsei University College of Medicine, Severance Hospital and Gangnam Severance Hospital between January 2005 and September 2015. After excluding 21 patients, the remaining 26 were divided into 2 groups: those who underwent open surgery (OS) and those who underwent laparoscopic surgery (LS). We compared clinicopathological features between the 2 groups. Results: There was no significant difference in operation time, estimated blood loss, transfusion, complication, recurrence, or follow-up period between 2 groups. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LS group versus the OS group (OS vs. LS, 7.00 ± 3.43 days vs. 4.50 ± 2.16 days; P = 0.031). Conclusion: We suggest that laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign NL is feasible and safe by obtaining complete resection of the tumor. LS for treating retroperitoneal benign NL could be useful with appropriate laparoscopic technique and proper patient selection.
AB - Purpose: The aim of this study was to verify that laparoscopic resection for treating retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma (NL) is expected to be favorable for complete resection of tumor with technical feasibility and safety. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 47 operations for retroperitoneal neurogenic tumor at Yonsei University College of Medicine, Severance Hospital and Gangnam Severance Hospital between January 2005 and September 2015. After excluding 21 patients, the remaining 26 were divided into 2 groups: those who underwent open surgery (OS) and those who underwent laparoscopic surgery (LS). We compared clinicopathological features between the 2 groups. Results: There was no significant difference in operation time, estimated blood loss, transfusion, complication, recurrence, or follow-up period between 2 groups. Postoperative hospital stay was significantly shorter in the LS group versus the OS group (OS vs. LS, 7.00 ± 3.43 days vs. 4.50 ± 2.16 days; P = 0.031). Conclusion: We suggest that laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign NL is feasible and safe by obtaining complete resection of the tumor. LS for treating retroperitoneal benign NL could be useful with appropriate laparoscopic technique and proper patient selection.
U2 - 10.4174/astr.2017.92.3.149
DO - 10.4174/astr.2017.92.3.149
JO - Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research
JF - Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research
Ji JH, Park JS, Kang CM, Yoon DS, Yoon WJ. Laparoscopic resection of retroperitoneal benign neurilemmoma. Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research. 2017 Mar;92(3):149-155. https://doi.org/10.4174/astr.2017.92.3.149
10.4174/astr.2017.92.3.149


text:
Vol. 63 No. 10 (2018) /
Physics of magnetic phenomena and physics of ferroics
Impact of the Flexoelectric Coupling and Electrostriction on the Dispersion of Soft Phonon Modes and Neutron Scattering in Ferroelectrics
C. M. Scherbakov Taras Shevchenko National University of Kiev
https://doi.org/10.15407/ujpe63.10.934
flexocoupling, electrostriction, soft phonon dispersion, neutron scattering spectra, ferroelectrics
Within the Landau–Ginzburg–Devonshire (LGD) theory framework, the impact of the flexocoupling and electrostriction on the soft phonon dispersion and neutron scattering spectra is analyzed, and analytical expressions are derived. The impact of the higher gradient term in the LGD functional is studied analytically. The existence of incommensurate modulations in a temperature interval higher than the Curie temperature TC, but lower than the temperature of incommensurate phase transition TIC, TC < T < TIC, and under the condition of the flexocoefficient magnitude ranging over the critical value, |f| > fcr(T), is established. The influence of the dynamic flexocoefficient M, suggested in [1], on phonon spectra is studied. We consider various parameters of the free energy functional; especially, we have discovered a significant contribution of the electrostriction to the appearance of a commensurate phase. In the recent years, the various methods based on the neutron scattering acquire more applications to study phonons in solid crystals. We have analyzed neutron scattering spectra and shown that theoretical predictions are in a very good agreement with observed data.
P.V. Yudin, A.K. Tagantsev. Fundamentals of exoelectricity in solids. Nanotechnology 24, 432001 (2013).
https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/24/43/432001
M.D. Glinchuk, A.V. Ragulya, V.A. Stephanovich. Nano-ferroics (Springer, 2013), p. 378.
V.S. Mashkevich, K.B. Tolpygo. The interaction of vibrations of nonpolar crystals with electric fields. Sov. Phys. JETP 4, 455 (1957).
A.K. Tagantsev. Piezoelectricity and exoelectricity in crystalline dielectrics. Phys. Rev. B 34, 5883 (1986).
P. Zubko, G. Catalan, A.K. Tagantsev. Flexoelectric effect in solids. Ann. Rev. Mater. Research 43, 387 (2013).
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-matsci-071312-121634
S.V. Kalinin, A.N. Morozovska. Multiferroics: Focusing the light on exoelectricity (comment). Nature Nanotechnology 10, 916 (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2015.213
A. Kvasov, A.K. Tagantsev. Dynamic exoelectric effect in perovskites from first-principles calculations. Phys. Rev. B 92, 054104 (2015).
W. Cochran. Crystal stability and the theory of ferroelectricity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 3, 412 (1959).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.3.412
G. Shirane, J.D. Axe, J. Harada, J.P. Remeika. Soft ferroelectric modes in lead titanate. Phys. Rev. B 2, 155 (1970).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.2.155
W. Cochran. Dynamical scattering and dielectric properties of ferroelectric crystals. Adv. in Phys. 18, 157 (1969).
G. Shirane, Y. Yamada. Lattice-dynamical study of the 110 K phase transition in SrTiO3. Phys. Rev. 177, 858 (1969).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRev.177.858
R. Currat, H. Buhay, C.H. Perry, A.M. Quittet. Inelastic neutron scattering study of anharmonic interactions in orthorhombic KNbO3. Phys. Rev. B 40, 10741 (1989).
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.40.10741
I. Etxebarria, M. Quilichini, J.M. Perez-Mato, P. Boutrouille, F.J. Zuniga, T. Breczewski. Inelastic neutron scattering investigation of external modes in incommensurate and commensurate A2BX4 materials. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 4, 8551 (1992).
https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/4/44/016
J. Hlinka, M. Quilichini, R. Currat, J.F. Legrand, Dynamical properties of the normal phase of betaine calcium chloride dihydrate. I. Experimental results. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 8, 8207 (1996).
J. Hlinka, S. Kamba, J. Petzelt, J. Kulda, C.A. Randall, S.J. Zhang. Origin of the "waterfall" effect in phonon dispersion of relaxor perovskites. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 107602 (2003).
V. Goian, S. Kamba, O. Pacherova, J. Drahokoupil, L. Palatinus, M. Duˇsek, J. Rohlˇcek, M. Savinov, F. Laufek, W. Schranz, A. Fuith, M. Kachlk, K. Maca, A. Shkabko, L. Sagarna, A. Weidenkaff, A.A. Belik. Antiferrodistortive phase transition in EuTiO3. Phys. Rev. B 86, 054112 (2012).
Jong-Woo Kim, P. Thompson, S. Brown, P.S. Normile, J.A. Schlueter, A. Shkabko, A. Weidenkaff, P.J. Ryan. Emergent superstructural dynamic order due to competing antiferroelectric and antiferrodistortive instabilities in bulk EuTiO3. Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 027201 (2013).
R.G. Burkovsky, A.K. Tagantsev, K. Vaideeswaran, N. Setter, S.B. Vakhrushev, A.V. Filimonov, A. Shaganov et al. Lattice dynamics and antiferroelectricity in PbZrO3 tested by x-ray and Brillouin light scattering. Phys. Rev. B 90, 144301 (2014).
J. Hlinka, I. Gregora, V. Vorlcek. Complete spectrum of long-wavelength phonon modes in Sn2P2S6 by Raman scattering. Phys. Rev. B 65, 064308 (2002).
A. Kohutych, R. Yevych, S. Perechinskii, V. Samulionis, J. Banys, Yu. Vysochanskii. Sound behavior near the Lifshitz point in proper ferroelectrics. Phys. Rev. B 82, 054101 (2010).
A. Kohutych, R. Yevych, S. Perechinskii, Y. Vysochanskii. Acoustic attenuation in ferroelectric Sn2P2S6 crystals. Open Physics 8, 905 (2010).
https://doi.org/10.2478/s11534-010-0016-x
Yu.M. Vysochanskii, A.A. Kohutych, A.V. Kityk, A.V. Zadorozhna, M.M. Khoma, A.A. Grabar. Tricritical behavior of Sn2P2S6 ferroelectrics at hydrostatic pressure. Ferroelectrics 399, 83 (2010).
R.M. Yevych, Yu.M. Vysochanskii, M.M. Khoma, S.I. Perechinskii. Lattice instability at phase transitions near the Lifshitz point in proper monoclinic ferroelectrics. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 18, 4047 (2006).
https://doi.org/10.1088/0953-8984/18/16/011
A.N. Morozovska, Yu.M. Vysochanskii, O.V. Varenyk, M.V. Silibin, S.V. Kalinin, E.A. Eliseev. Flexocoupling impact on the generalized susceptibility and soft phonon modes in the ordered phase of ferroics. Phys. Rev. B 92, 094308 (2015).
A.N. Morozovska, E.A. Eliseev, C.M. Scherbakov, Yu.M. Vysochanskii. The influence of elastic strain gradient on the upper limit of exocoupling strength, spatially-modulated phases and soft phonon dispersion in ferroics. Phys. Rev. B 94, 174112 (2016).
A.N. Morozovska, M.D. Glinchuk, E.A. Eliseev, Yu.M. Vysochanskii. Flexocoupling-induced soft acoustic mode and the spatially modulated phases in ferroelectrics. Phys. Rev. B 96, 094111 (2017).
A.N. Morozovska, V.V. Khist, M.D. Glinchuk, C.M. Scherbakov, M.V. Silibin, D.V. Karpinsky, E.A. Eliseev. Flexoelectricity-induced spatially modulated phases in ferroics and liquid crystals. J. Molecul. Liq. 267, 550 (2018); arXiv:1710.01033.
L.D. Landau, E.M. Lifshitz. Theory of Elasticity. Theoretical Physics (Butterworth-Heinemann, 1998), Vol. 7.
S.W.H. Eijt, R. Currat, J.E. Lorenzo, P. Saint-Gregoire, B. Hennion, Yu.M. Vysochanskii. Soft modes and phonon interactions in Sn2P2S6 studied by neutron scattering. Eur. Phys. J. B 5, 169 (1998).
E.A. Eliseev, A.N. Morozovska, M.D. Glinchuk, R. Blinc. Spontaneous exoelectric/exomagnetic effect in nanoferroics. Phys. Rev. B 79, 165433 (2009).
P.V. Yudin, R. Ahluwalia, A.K. Tagantsev. Upper bounds for exocoupling coeffcients in ferroelectrics. Appl. Phys. Lett. 104, 082913 (2014).
S. Mao, P.K. Purohit. Insights into exoelectric solids from strain-gradient elasticity. J. Appl. Mech. 81, 081004 (2014).
M. Stengel. Unified ab initio formulation of exoelectricity and strain-gradient elasticity. Phys. Rev. B 93, 245107 (2016).
N.H. March, W.H. Young, S. Sampanthar. The Many-Body Problem in Quantum Mechanics (Cambridge Univ. Press, 1967).
C.P. Bean, D.S. Rodbell. Magnetic disorder as a first-order phase transformation. Phys. Rev. B 126, 104 (1962).
Scherbakov, C. M. (2018). Impact of the Flexoelectric Coupling and Electrostriction on the Dispersion of Soft Phonon Modes and Neutron Scattering in Ferroelectrics. Ukrainian Journal of Physics, 63(10), 934. https://doi.org/10.15407/ujpe63.10.934
Vol. 63 No. 10 (2018)
License to Publish the Paper
The corresponding author and the co-authors (hereon referred to as the Author(s)) of the paper being submitted to the Ukrainian Journal of Physics (hereon referred to as the Paper) from one side and the Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, represented by its Director (hereon referred to as the Publisher) from the other side have come to the following Agreement:
1. Subject of the Agreement.
The Author(s) grant(s) the Publisher the free non-exclusive right to use the Paper (of scientific, technical, or any other content) according to the terms and conditions defined by this Agreement.
2. The ways of using the Paper.
2.1. The Author(s) grant(s) the Publisher the right to use the Paper as follows.
2.1.1. To publish the Paper in the Ukrainian Journal of Physics (hereon referred to as the Journal) in original language and translated into English (the copy of the Paper approved by the Author(s) and the Publisher and accepted for publication is a constitutive part of this License Agreement).
2.1.2. To edit, adapt, and correct the Paper by approval of the Author(s).
2.1.3. To translate the Paper in the case when the Paper is written in a language different from that adopted in the Journal.
2.2. If the Author(s) has(ve) an intent to use the Paper in any other way, e.g., to publish the translated version of the Paper (except for the case defined by Section 2.1.3 of this Agreement), to post the full Paper or any its part on the web, to publish the Paper in any other editions, to include the Paper or any its part in other collections, anthologies, encyclopaedias, etc., the Author(s) should get a written permission from the Publisher.
3. License territory.
The Author(s) grant(s) the Publisher the right to use the Paper as regulated by sections 2.1.1–2.1.3 of this Agreement on the territory of Ukraine and to distribute the Paper as indispensable part of the Journal on the territory of Ukraine and other countries by means of subscription, sales, and free transfer to a third party.
4. Duration.
4.1. This Agreement is valid starting from the date of signature and acts for the entire period of the existence of the Journal.
5. Loyalty.
5.1. The Author(s) warrant(s) the Publisher that:
– he/she is the true author (co-author) of the Paper;
– copyright on the Paper was not transferred to any other party;
– the Paper has never been published before and will not be published in any other media before it is published by the Publisher (see also section 2.2);
– the Author(s) do(es) not violate any intellectual property right of other parties. If the Paper includes some materials of other parties, except for citations whose length is regulated by the scientific, informational, or critical character of the Paper, the use of such materials is in compliance with the regulations of the international law and the law of Ukraine.
6. Requisites and signatures of the Parties.
Publisher: Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
Address: Ukraine, Kyiv, Metrolohichna Str. 14-b.
Author: Electronic signature on behalf and with endorsement of all co-authors.
A. N. Morozovska, C. M. Scherbakov, M. D. Glinchuk, Dependence of Soft Phonon Spectra on Flexoelectric Coupling in Ferroelectrics , Ukrainian Journal of Physics: Vol. 63 No. 2 (2018)
A. N. Morozovska, M. D. Glinchuk, O. V. Varenyk, A. Udod, C. M. Scherbakov, S. V. Kalinin, Flexoelectric Effect Impact on the Hysteretic Dynamics of the Local Electromechanical Response of Mixed Ionic-Electronic Conductors , Ukrainian Journal of Physics: Vol. 62 No. 4 (2017)
0372-400Х (Edition in Ukrainian)
2071-0186 (Edition in English)
2071-0194 (in electronic form)
Ukrainian Journal of Physics
Abbreviated title:
Ukr. J. Phys.
Recognised:
Journal Indexing:
© Ukrainian Journal of Physics, 2021
Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Eric Johnson is a machinist by trade and has a degree in mechanical drafting and design. He has been employed with Kern Laser Systems the past 18 years building and selling laser equipment. He is currently a sales consultant working with new and custom CO2 applications.
The best stone material for outdoor use is black granite. The common igneous rock that many countertops and cemeteries use for headstones works well for laser etching murals, too. If you are considering inside use, use a large amount of black marble tiles or even tempered glass works well. The finer the grains and the more solid black, the better.
The color black works well with murals as it creates a beautiful black-and-white image. One of the most common reasons people want to behold art in black and white today is because it lends a certain timeless quality to the images.


text:
7 Types of Chemical Reactions| Their examples
Chemical reaction is the way by which the life functions on the earth.
Most changes in the matter takes place by some sort of chemical reaction.
The whole science of chemistry revolves around chemical reactions.
There are many types of chemical reactions to suit different needs of the matter.
In general a chemical reaction brings a significant change to the parent molecule involved.
Almost all the chemical reaction happen in liquid form or gaseous form.
So for the chemical reaction to happen, the molecules must be freely moving.
Chemical reaction are many and they are studied in organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry, biochemistry, phyto-chemistry etc.
In general chemical reactions are used for purposes like synthesis of new molecule, analysis of a test substance, identification of a substance, degradation or break down of a molecule, etc.
Types of Chemical Reactions
1. Neutralization reactions: These are the reactions which occur in between and acid and base. These reactions result in formation of water and salt in general. The end product can also be a weak acid or base if weak base or weak acid is used in the reaction.
The pH at end point is 7 for a reaction between strong acid and strong base. But it can above 7 for reaction between strong base and weak acid. And below pH7 if the reaction is between strong acid and weak base. These reactions are used in industry and research for analysis of compounds by acid-base titrations. Also this reaction is used to treat stomach acidity in health care by use of antacids.
2. Redox reactions: These reactions are also called as oxidation-reduction reactions. The redox reactions mostly involve oxidation of one substance while other substance is reduced. Oxidation involves either
Either addition of oxygen
Removal of hydrogen
Or removal of electrons
Reduction involves either
Removal of oxygen.
Addition of hydrogen.
Addition of electron.
3. Complexation reaction: This is a reaction which leads to formation of an insoluble chemical complex. These reactions are done for sake of analysis, quality control or to treat poisoning.
4. Substitution reactions: These are the reactions in which an atom, element or chemical group is removed from the previous molecule. This type of reaction is also termed under displacement reaction.
5. Addition reactions: These are the reactions in which there is chemical addition. I.e. there is an addition of chemical group, element or an atom to the main molecule in the reaction.
This can be a synthesis reaction in making of new compounds.
6. Elimination reactions: As the name indicates, these are the reactions in which there is elimination of an atom, chemical group or element from the main molecule.
Below is an example of a reaction where from Ethanol molecule, water is removed off to form ethylene or ethene.
7. Rearrangement reactions: These are a different set of reactions where is there is neither addition or nor elimination of an atom, chemical group or an element from the parent molecule. Here the parent molecule is just changed in terms of chemical structure and configuration. Many isomers come under this type of reactions.
Storage Roots | Their Types, Differences with Examples
Nitrogen Electron Configuration | Reactions of Valence Electrons
Electrons in Carbon |Their Valency and Configuration.
Alcohol Reactions in Organic Chemistry and Synthesis


Luke Bryan isn't ready to stop his "Kill the Lights" tour just yet. The country singer announced additional tour dates for the trek, scheduled to pick up in February and March of 2017. Luke Bryan's new tour leg, which will feature Brett Eldredge as the opening act, will begin at the Big Sandy Superstore Arena on February 16. The two will hit a total of 11 shows before wrapping the run on March 17 in Orange Beach, Alabama. The singer's most recent tour leg wrapped in late October in Detroit's Ford Field.
Luke Bryan tickets go on sale to the general public this Friday, December 2. Pre-sale tickets will first be available through on November 30 via Bryan's website. Fans can also rely on the secondary market for tickets, as most markets are expected to sell out quickly.
(UPDATE 2/18/16) It's the moment country music fans have been waiting for all winter. Luke Bryan will launch his "Kill the Lights" Tour in Indiana tonight, making the first of 65 stops in the U.S. and Canada through the end of October. Be prepared to pay big prices if hoping to attend an upcoming show, however - Luke Bryan tickets on the secondary market are averaging a cool $207.32 across the eight-month trek.
The "Kick the Dust Up" singer will play his most expensive show on September 15 at Toyota Amphitheatre in Wheatland, CA, where tickets currently average $505.74 and the get-in price is $56. No other shows will average above $500, but five other gigs currently top the $300 average. Those shows include June 2 at PNC Bank Arts Center ($471.15 avg./$104 get-in), September 16 at Shoreline Amphitheatre ($410.68 avg./$58 get-in) and April 16 at John Paul Jones Arena ($378.17 avg/$63 get-in).
Even Bryan's cheapest shows are generating massive ticket demand. He'll play his least expensive show at INTRUST Bank Arena on May 13, where tickets average $121.97 and the get-in price is $24. Other cheapest-priced shows will be held at Chesapeake Energy Arena on May 14 ($142.04 avg./$57 get-in) and Brick Breeden Fieldhouse on April 22 ($146.91 avg./$75 get-in).
The Kill the Lights Tour continues until October 29 and will culminate at Ford Field in Detroit. Little Big Town, Dustin Lynch and Frankie Ballard will join Bryan on most tour dates.
The stage just got a whole lot bigger for Luke Bryan.
After setting his fan base into a frenzy with the announcement of his "Kill The Lights' Tour in October, the country superstar has revealed a second batch of North American dates between May and October. The newly announced leg will run over 45 shows, including stadium dates at Gillette Stadium, Wrigley Field, AT&T Stadium and Ford Field.
Bryan will officially kick things off in February and make his first run through the U.S. and Canada through mid-May. He'll take a week-long intermission before revving back up for his second leg, which launches on May 21 at Lakewood Amphitheater in Atlanta. 61 dates in total are scheduled over the nine-month trek.
(UPDATE 10/21/15) Country star Luke Bryan will be back out on the road in 2016.
Though still touring the U.S. on his "Kick the Dust Up" Tour, Bryan has wasted no time announcing future touring plans>. On Wednesday the singer revealed dates and cities for his upcoming "Kill the Lights" Tour, which pegs him on the road between February and May of next year.
The tour launches on February 18 at Ford Center in Evansville, Indiana and runs through May 14 at Chesapeake Energy Arena in Oklahoma City. 21 shows in total are scheduled over the three-month tour. Little Big Town will support on most dates.
The tour will run in support of the aptly named album that dropped in August. Presale tickets and general public on sale will be made available next month. Citi cardholders will have exclusive access to tickets via Citi's Private Pass Program.
Luke Bryan will take veteran Randy Houser and Dustin Lynch along with him for a handful of additional tour dates announced for February 21st, including Orlando, Louisville, and Indiana.
The current leg of Bryan's massive tour finishes up on October 26th in California with those Luke Bryan tickets averaging $155.03 on the secondary market. The cheapest date of this leg is October 16th at Sleep Train Amphitheatre – Wheatland, while the most expensive is the world famous Hollywood Bowl on October 25th.
Just three months after concluding his Dirt Road Diaries tour, one of country music's most popular male vocalists will head back out on to the road following the release of Luke Bryan tickets for 20 shows across North America in 2014.
Named after his last single, the That's My Kind Of Night tour will kick off at Columbus' Schottenstein Center on January 16 (TicketIQ get-in price $92/average price $314) before stopping off at the likes of Lubbock's United Sprint Arena on January 30 ($162/$515), Wilkes Barre's Mohegan Sun Arena at Casey Plaza on February 14 ($56/$345) and Saint Paul's Xcel Energy Center on March 2 ($167/$385).
Initially scheduled to conclude at Bossier City's CenturyLink Center on March 8, the 37-year-old will now also take in a second performance at New York's Madison Square Garden on September 12 ($93/$780) following a string of summer festival dates.
Luke Bryan tickets are still up for grabs for most shows with the January 17 gig at Lexington's Rupp Arena currently the lowest get-in price at $39 (average price $333) and the February 7 concert at Cedar Falls' Uni-dome the cheapest average price at $174 (get-in price $75).
Fans can also get their hands on tickets for several of his festival appearances including Stagecoach on April 27 at $322/$373 (3-day passes are also available for $338/$1110), Bayou Country Superfest on May 24 at $148/$343 (2-day passes $182/$238 and 3-day passes $90/$204). While 2-day passes for the Florida Country Superfest on June 14-15 and 4-day passes for the Boots and Heart Music Festival on July 31-August 3 are also on offer at $228/$761 and $444/$456 respectively.
Alongside support slots from Lee Brice and Cole Swindell, those with Luke Bryan tickets can also look forward to hearing all the highlights from Crash My Party, which gave him a second Billboard 200 chart-topper this year following the Spring Break… Here To Party compilation.
Remember you can also sell concert tickets for free on TicketIQ.com with Seller Direct.


text:
Board index Off Topic Current Events
Democratic Presidential Campaign 2020
Discussion relating to current events, politics, religion, etc
mockbee
Re: Democratic Presidential Campaign 2020
#141 Post by mockbee » Fri Jan 31, 2020 12:33 pm
chaos wrote: ↑
With regard to the votes (or lack thereof) in the 2012 election between Romney and Obama:
1. While Evangelicals and Mormons tend to align politically, they do not theologically. That is, many Evangelicals do not see Mormons as Christians. As a result a large number of Evangelicals did not vote (or did not vote for either mainstream candidate).
2. Romney alienated a large segment of the population with these comments just before the elections:
In his remarks, Romney used broad strokes to characterize millions of people who he said solidly support President Barack Obama.
"There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what," Romney said in the video. "All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it. That that's an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what.
"And I mean the president starts out with 48, 49 percent … he starts off with a huge number," Romney continued. "These are people who pay no income tax. Forty-seven percent of Americans pay no income tax. So our message of low taxes doesn't connect. So he'll be out there talking about tax cuts for the rich. I mean, that's what they sell every four years. And so my job is is not to worry about those people. I'll never convince them that they should take personal responsibility and care for their lives."
With regard to the 2016 election between Clinton and Trump:
1.) The Evangelicals who would not vote for Romney, voted for Trump.
2.) Many Obama voters alienated by Romney were later alienated by the democratic party - for many reasons. The water crisis in Flint, MI is one specific example.
3.)
kv wrote: ↑
Religion, racism, classism, sexism, traditions, education (myriad of reasons)
Number one is Religion....which trump gets more than most...one side kills babies...get past that if your are super religious...most cant...that's the main problem in my view
4.) Bernie supporters were pissed
Alright, some of these points I had not fully considered before. Looking at the arguments I can see why these factors helped Trump but am still not convinced that the Trump win was based on these factors.
He was Trump with no track record of knowing what the hell he was doing....... and he got 62,984,828 votes.
Something more is going on here.....
Now he has 3 years of what would be considered major victories in any other presidency, and oh yes, he still is Trump, but I don't see that mattering a lick.
1) Interesting point. I looked up the statistics and found this:
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... -analysis/
Now if you look at the White Evangelicals vs Mormon statistic for Romney '16 vs Trump '20.
You see a +3% swing for Trump for the Evangelicals
(using back of the napkin math with these statistics that is a 1 million vote increase for Trump. Not insignificant.)
However, you had 17% of Mormons who completely bailed. Which may be statistically insignificant because the vast majority were likely in Utah, which wasn't a factor....
Also you had +4% Catholics swing, another 1 million votes for Trump.
(AND uhhhhhh......... Hispanic Catholics have BIG swing for Trump vs Romney!!!!! This just shows how completely tone deaf the Democratic Party is when it comes to minority votes. They are completely and totally clueless........ )
Finally, where the hell were the non-evangelical Protestants for Clinton???????????????????
A misogynist, philander, accused rapist, foul mouthed asshole who despises the poor......
Most all non-crazy religious folk where abortion is not top priority are unperturbed, or in fact slightly encouraged................... ALL of them!
Outside the Mormons, I'll give them credit.
Something strange going on here, not just about abortion.....
The independent religious folks obviously were not swayed.
2) Well, I would argue this didn't impact any votes from traditional Republicans vs Democrats. Pretty much their premise from the start, just he said it.
1) Alright, I'll give you the Million vote swing... see above.
2) Totally agree with this. Biden is just one more lumbering behemouth Democrat going off the cliff.......
3) I think the important point from kv here, is the classism (the $$$$$$, the crony capitalism) that is not being discussed in an intelligent manner by the media or the vast majority of candidates. Yang, Sanders and Warren being the exception, but they are not connecting with working people....still egghead talk. That does not resonate, obviously. It just reinforces their elite/academic stereotype.
Ask Creep about that if you think that I am being the Elite one here...........
4) Uh.....YEAH! Do you think Bernie people voted for Trump the first time? Really? That is HUGE. Like GIGANTIC!!!!!!!!!
If Bernie is forced out, like he is in the process of being right now. This will come back SO hard at Biden. They, Bernie faithful, are looking for revolution. This isn't 2000 anymore with Nader. You will see close to a revolt. Dem Convention will be chaos, think '68, maybe worse.....
That's just what I see happening.
#142 Post by mockbee » Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:07 pm
mockbee wrote: ↑
I should add, the Republican Jews somewhat bailed as well.
Location: South Bay, SoCal
#143 Post by kv » Fri Jan 31, 2020 1:15 pm
Yes I honestly think people that wanted Bernie hated Clinton more than trump...and after Hillary and Bernie went at it a while a bunch of his voters did vote trump
Clinton backlash will be cute compared to the backlash with Biden and a woman VP.
Bernie already feels cheated. Iowa will be interesting......
I see Seattle/Portland/SF/Oakland/LA/Denver/Boise/Minneapolis/Chicago/Detroit/NO/Miami/Pittsburgh/Philly/NYC/and any college town will have significantly suppressed Dem vote and uptick in Trump votes with Biden.
More traditional New England urban/rural areas I could see being unswayed.
That will be the nail in the coffin and final split of the Dem party.
#145 Post by Pandemonium » Fri Jan 31, 2020 2:43 pm
Democratic party is undergoing similar upheavals with their far left Progressives that the Republican party endured with the Tea Party movement last decade. It weakens them as a party in the short term but eventually after a few election cycles, the fringe either falls in line with the party status quo or gets weeded out.
Unfortunately for Dems, the timing for such divisiveness isn't good right now - they have a serious problem going forward to this election as few old schoolers want a far left socialist like Sanders running for their party nomination. But right now he's virtually tied with mainstream Biden and at some point, that is going to either lead to 2016-esque party shenanigans to lock him out and/or a bitter and divisive contested convention.
You'd think with all the nonsense and baggage Trump carries, anyone could beat him but Dems have been tripping over their own feet since he got elected and after this failed bid to get him out of office, there's a very real chance he'll get a second term.
Hundreds of people were protesting in DC yesterday to demand accountability during the impeachment trial, when it looked all but certain that no witnesses would be called.
Hundreds!!!!!......in the capitol.
https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing ... -witnesses
There were maybe 6 or possibly a dozen people in Portland protesting when I drove by downtown yesterday, demanding a fair trial.
One of the most liberal/progressive cities in the country.
Generally people don't seem impassioned by the impeachment.
Frustrated. Yes.
But we are talking about the fate of the country right? The fate of the country!
And six people show up in a super liberal city with 2.5 million GMA people?
It's Bernie or Bust (and I mean BUST!) here.......that's all I see.
You don't win elections with, well...... I suppose that guy........
#147 Post by mockbee » Sat Feb 01, 2020 5:37 am
Pandemonium wrote: ↑
I don't understand this part of your statement Panda. The Republican Party (classic) is no more. It is Trump's Party exclusively. Look at what just happened with no evidence with impeachment. NO EVIDENCE! A-okay with "Repubs"????
Same coming for Dems. And very soon.
I think "Tea Party" stage will be pretty quickly cycled through this Summer. And yeah, next election cycle will see the interloper, AOC.
Your favorite!
#148 Post by Hype » Sat Feb 01, 2020 10:47 am
There is no one in the Democratic party who is remotely "far left". This is how far right US politics has shifted. Bernie Sanders is not a communist, and he's barely a socialist at this point. AOC is not a socialist. Barack Obama was a neoliberal. They're barely left of center, and in many metrics they're effectively right of center compared to the rest of the world.
#149 Post by mockbee » Sat Feb 01, 2020 11:36 am
Hype wrote: ↑
I totally agree with you.
Now try telling that to HRC and traditional "Dems"......
They are acting really, really dumb here.....
But she is not dumb.
It's about power and $$$$$, and hoodwinking the rest...
drwintercreeper
#150 Post by drwintercreeper » Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:07 pm
This is to no one in particular but just a general thought:
Assuming Bernie and his posse of in-your face sycophants clinch the nomination, you guys are going to do about as well as Dukakis did in '88. Our cock smoker president will then coast to re-election. So great job going on being totally and passionately uncompromising; please send me a button once the election is over so I can jizz on it when I am feeling extra angry.
Radicals on both sides of the isle are not helping the country one iota. This whole field of candidates is less than thrilling, to put it mildly... but the psychos that are basically chanting "Bernie or let's BURN THE FUCKER DOWN!!!!" are making me think this might be an election I sit out. Probably not, but only because I can't stand the current corrupt fuck that occupies 1600 Penn. Bernie's hardcore supporters remind me of Trump supporters more each day. Congrats I guess?
The number one priority should be getting the incompetent child out of office. If that means voting for a left shoe or a dirty pair of socks, then count me in. But the hardcore Bernie crowd makes me want to
#151 Post by mockbee » Sat Feb 01, 2020 1:57 pm
Alas, it will be a disaster and Trump will win with close to Reagan '84 type victory.
If this happens, where "close to Reagan '84" means greater than, say, 55% of the popular vote, and greater than 45 of the states (Reagan had 58.8% of the PV and 49 states, but not DC), then I'll personally buy you a book from your Amazon wish list.
Alright.......your terms, you're on.
You have to admit the over under is well in your favor.
Here's the book:
https://www.amazon.com/Glenn-Murcutt-Bu ... utt&sr=8-6
Just to make it more interesting, if Trump just flat wins the popular and, of course, electoral....
Then this book:
https://www.amazon.com/Glenn-Murcutt-Si ... 1864701366
And if Dem ticket wins ELECTORAL/presidency I will get you a book of your choice. $60 or under....
Finally, if it mirrors '16 and Trump loses popular and wins electoral its a draw. No prizes.....
Things are going to be moving quickly pretty soon here. I might just hold you to the original bet, with no adjusted terms.
Maybe you can get some people to chip in?
I'll eat crow if a Biden wins.
Six7Six7
#152 Post by Six7Six7 » Sat Feb 01, 2020 5:44 pm
drwintercreeper wrote: ↑
99.999% of those people will fade into the background and you won't hear a peep once the election is over.
And I guarantee they won't be wearing blue hats that say "Make America Socialist Again"
#VoteBlueNoMatterWho
#153 Post by Hype » Sun Feb 02, 2020 5:51 pm
I'm not optimistic about a Dem win, I just thought your comparison to Reagan was outlandish. I still think that. Some of the prices on those books have come down, it seems. (Paperback for $50? That's totally reasonable...) I just don't have hundreds of dollars at the moment even if I do think I'll win the bet. I'm not conceited enough to think I could ever have 100% certainty on a complex outcome like this. It's more like... 89%. I'm game, but I reserve the right to seek out an affordable (but decent) copy.
#154 Post by mockbee » Sun Feb 02, 2020 6:56 pm
Alright, we'll keep it under $60 for the Trump >55% pop and >45 states. I might change the book instead of a used copy because many of those end up being stolen library copies or vandalized. These are high quality large format photographs whose pages end up being worth money in themselves.
46 states is still pretty crazy in the current mass media (-fox) and liberal elite mindset climate....he'd have to get OR/WA/HI and most all the NE states.
#155 Post by mockbee » Tue Feb 04, 2020 8:46 am
Glad I don't live in Iowa. What an embarrassment.
I wouldnt even want to be in a neighboring state....
SR should be getting a little nervous about his $1k...
Democrats/DNC have had an astounding amount of hubris, amplified over the last three years. You could see this coming from miles away. I wonder when they will step back and decide to change....?
This is the entire story here. A harbinger for the entire lead up to election day. Has seemed in plain sight to me since Trump was elected. There is a major reality gap with the elite establishment that is not being recognized.
And I suspect will still not be.....
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/04/opin ... e=Homepage
First came the reports — trickling in from caucus leaders, precinct captains and observers — that the app wasn't working properly. On Monday evening a precinct captain told me by text that their caucus manager was "unable to get the app from the Democratic Party to work" and "had to do the math to figure out delegates 'long hand.'" FiveThirtyEight's Amelia Thomson-Deveaux spoke to a frustrated caucus leader who suggested the app itself wouldn't download. "We could not problem-solve getting the app onto one of our devices," he told her. NBC News reported some caucus leaders had missed the window to download the app altogether. The Biden campaign issued a letter to Iowa party leaders suggesting the app had failed.
Reckless speculation followed about possible security problems with the technology. Stories from late last month raising concerns about the caucus app's vulnerabilities recirculated on Twitter. Among the chief fears: The app was to be downloaded directly to the phones of caucus volunteers, making it difficult to ensure the safety of the devices.
After midnight, The Huffington Post reported that Shadow, a tech company funded by the progressive digital media firm Acronym, was responsible for building the app. Shadow, according to its website, bills itself "as building a long-term, side-by-side 'Shadow' of tech infrastructure to the Democratic Party and the progressive community at large." Acronym quickly put out a statement distancing itself from Shadow and noting, "We, like everyone else, are eagerly awaiting more information from the Iowa Democratic Party."
There's a great deal we don't know yet about Shadow and the caucus app. But its apparent failure is a nightmare scenario for Democrats and the political left. Quite simply, the party desperately needs to win the internet in their race to beat President Trump. That means building infrastructure to connect and assuage voters, controlling the narrative and overcoming the substantial time advantage held by the president. In its first critical test, the party systematically undermined each of those goals.
#157 Post by mockbee » Thu Feb 06, 2020 8:09 pm
Don't worry. Biden will be your nominee.
There is no way Sanders will be allowed to win by DNC.
And he will struggle in the big and the southern states like against Clinton.
But, I would be thinking more in line of Mondale loss rather than Dukakis with the Biden ticket.
He did terrrrrrrible in Iowa.
Nobody wants him, and many progressives actively dislike him. But he'll be the guy.
#158 Post by drwintercreeper » Thu Feb 06, 2020 9:06 pm
Biden seems to be toast now. I love Pete but he will lose. At this point, Bloomberg is seeming more possible... but super tuesday will show if his strategy of waiting is sound.
I will do my part and vote for whoever the dem nominee is... even if it means Bernie. Lord knows my vote won't count in kansas, but i will still do my part to vote against president orange cumstain.
#159 Post by chaos » Sat Feb 15, 2020 3:27 pm
https://nypost.com/2020/02/15/bloomberg ... _app&amp=1
Bloomberg reportedly considering Hillary Clinton as his running mate
By Mary Kay Linge
February 15, 2020 | 11:25am
He's with her?
Mike Bloomberg could team up with Hillary Clinton to try to take down President Trump in November — by making her his running mate.
Bloomberg's internal polling has found the combo "would be a formidable force," campaign sources told the Drudge Report Saturday.
Clinton, who lost her 2016 White House bid to Trump despite winning the popular vote, said last week that she would "probably" not accept an offer to run as another Democrat's veep.
"I never say never because I believe in serving my country," she told talk show host Ellen DeGeneres. "But it's never going to happen."
But the former New York mayor may press the question.
Clinton and Bloomberg were spotted together in December at a dinner with daughter Chelsea, Page Six reported – supposedly to celebrate the birthday of socialite Annette de la Renta.
#160 Post by mockbee » Sat Feb 15, 2020 11:08 pm
If US wealth (not income) were a pie, and there were 100 slices and, symbolically, there were 100 people in the US - one person (or 1%) would own 39 of those slices. While 50 people would have claim to no slices - and actually would OWE part of a slice.
The rest of the 61 slices would be unevenly divided amongst the other 49 people.
No other country can claim such a disapproportion of wealth near this size.
It really is an amazing con game the monied class, that absolutely includes to a huge degree HRC and Bloomberg, have done to hoodwink the American public that that bottom 50% just didn't work hard enough.
I absolutely think the Elite class need to be preserved, to a large sense in this country, in no small part for academic achievement, innovation investment, entrepreneurial excellence and to preserve liberty. But to continue down our current path seems to me, the guarantee that all of that will be thrown in the garbage in the groundswell revolt.
Maybe Bernie wakes us up. But still I dont see how the power brokers allow that....and I don't see that he has the following or aptitude to shift this gigantic freighter in a more sustainable direction.
Return to "Current Events"


text:
Will Harvey Weinstein charges stick? Judge to rule
Photo: Steven Hirsch/New York Post via AP
In this June 5, 2018 file photo, Harvey Weinstein appears in court in New York.
If Harvey Weinstein were in charge of the script, he'd be walking out of a court hearing Thursday free of the criminal charges threatening to put him behind bars.
The Hollywood producer-turned-#MeToo pariah is putting on his fiercest campaign yet to convince a New York judge to throw out his sexual assault case, seizing on allegations of unscrupulous police work and putting forth a witness who says his rape accuser pressured her to corroborate her story.
Weinstein's lawyers say the case has devolved into chaos and was "irreparably tainted" by police Det. Nicholas DiGaudio's alleged interference with a witness and an accuser. Prosecutors say there's "ample evidence" to put Weinstein, 66, on trial and that the DiGaudio allegations haven't sullied the rest of the case.
Now it's up to Judge James Burke to decide.
Weinstein is charged with raping a woman he knew in a hotel room in March 2013 and forcibly performing oral sex on another woman in 2006 at his Manhattan apartment. He denies all allegations of nonconsensual sex.
RELATED: Weinstein's lawyers: New evidence undermines rape charge
WHAT COULD HAPPEN?
Burke has a few options. He could side with Weinstein and dismiss some or all of the charges, or he could schedule a trial, which would be a win for prosecutors. He could also throw out the indictment, but give prosecutors time to seek a new one.
A dismissal of the charges would be a big setback to Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr., who was criticized for declining to pursue criminal charges against Weinstein when he was accused of groping an Italian model in 2015. It wouldn't rule out prosecutors bringing charges involving other women who say they were sexually assaulted by Weinstein in New York.
Burke could also keep the indictment in place, but grant the defense's request for an evidentiary hearing. There, police investigators could be summoned to court to answer questions about alleged misconduct.
RELATED: 'Stop this chaos:' Weinstein lawyer urges sex case dismissal
Weinstein's case started to turn in October when Manhattan prosecutors dropped one of the charges after evidence surfaced that DiGaudio instructed a potential witness in the case to keep some of her doubts about the veracity of the allegations to herself.
DiGaudio allegedly told the witness last February that "less is more" but kept prosecutors in the dark. That witness never testified before the grand jury that indicted Weinstein.
Prosecutors also disclosed an allegation that DiGaudio urged the 2013 rape accuser to delete private material from her cellphones before handing them over to the DA's office. Prosecutors said the material didn't pertain to Weinstein and the woman wound up not deleting anything.
Late last month, Weinstein's lawyers said they spoke to a woman who said the rape accuser asked her to corroborate her allegations, but the friend wouldn't "make up a story."
The friend told investigators that Weinstein and the accuser had been "hooking up" consensually for a while and that she never heard her say anything bad about him until last year, Weinstein's lawyer, Ben Brafman, said in a court filing.
RELATED: Prosecutors double down on Harvey Weinstein charges
WHAT DO WEINSTEIN'S LAWYERS SAY?
Brafman says the case has been "irreparably tainted" by alleged police misconduct. He is urging Burke to dismiss the case, writing in a recent court filing: "The only reasonably prudent decision would be to stop this chaos now."
WHAT DO PROSECUTORS SAY?
Prosecutors say there is "ample evidence" to move forward. In a court filing, Assistant District Attorney Kevin Wilson says "there is no possibility" that alleged police misconduct "in any way impaired the integrity of the grand jury or prejudiced the defendant."
Judge dismisses part of Judd's lawsuit against Weinstein
Kevin Spacey's lawyers enter not guilty plea in sex assault
Spacey: Court appearance would 'amplify' negative publicity
Louis C.K. mocks Parkland students in audio of stand-up set
Court records detail Spacey's encounter with teenager
Kevin Spacey is charged with groping a young man
Judge declines to throw out Harvey Weinstein criminal case
CBS denies former CEO Les Moonves $120 million severance
House, Senate reach agreement on anti-sexual harassment bill
Anthony Brousseau
Created: December 19, 2018 03:48 PM


text:
\section{Introduction}

Multiwavelength observations in our Galaxy and in other nearby galaxies have discovered and resolved hundreds of supernova remnants (SNRs). Theoretical inferences from these observations are not always straightforward. The distances to SNRs in our Galaxy are uncertain, while samples of other galaxies tend to be incomplete, with many remnants being below the detection threshold. Here we study the sample of SNRs found in the Magellanic Clouds (MCs) in the radio band, which provide us with an almost complete sample at a known distance (\citealp{badenesetal10};  hereafter BMD10).

Radio SNRs are thought to be produced in the shock that is formed as the supernova (SN) ejecta interacts with the external medium. Particles are accelerated in the expanding shock, magnetic fields are amplified, and particles radiate via the synchrotron mechanism (see, e.g., \citealp{woltjer72, chevalier82a, chevalier82b, chevalier98}, and recently, \citealp{dubnerandgiacani15}). Particle acceleration is thought to proceed via diffusive shock acceleration at SNRs shocks (e.g., \citealp{bell78, blandfordandostriker78}). The efficiency of particle acceleration and magnetic field amplification in SN shocks has been studied extensively (e.g., \citealp{reynoldsandellison92, vinkandlaming03, volketal05, uchiyamaetal07, thompsonetal09}), but it continues to be an active field of research.

In this Letter, we focus on modeling of radio SNRs in the MCs. Using a simple model of electron acceleration at the SN shock and the corresponding synchrotron emission (Section \ref{Toy_model}), we constrain the fraction of shocked fluid energy in non-thermal electrons ($\epsilon_e$) and magnetic field ($\epsilon_B$) for our chosen sample (Sections \ref{Sample} and \ref{Applications}). We will refer to these fractions as the ``microphysical" parameters. In order to explain both the SNR radio fluxes and their observed sizes in the MCs, we develop a simple Monte Carlo scheme that is able to reproduce these quantities (Section \ref{Monte_Carlo}).  This scheme makes use of the SN rate in the MCs, the observed energy distribution of SN explosions as well as the probability distribution of the densities that surround these SNRs (BMD10, \citealp{maozandbadenes10}). We find both a qualitative and quantitive agreement with the observations in the MCs.

\section{Model for SNR emission and size } \label{Toy_model}

After the SN explosion, the SN blast wave travels with constant velocity (the ``coasting" phase) until it sweeps enough external material and starts to decelerate. This occurs at a radius and time
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{\rm dec} &\approx& 7 \times 10^{18} {\rm cm} \, (E_{\rm 51}/n_0)^{1/3} v_9^{-2/3}, \label{R_dec} \\
t_{\rm dec} &\approx& 220 \, {\rm yr} \, (E_{51}/n_0)^{1/3} v_9^{-5/3},
\label{t_dec}
\end{eqnarray}
where $E$ is the kinetic energy of the SN explosion, $n$ is the number density of the external medium, $v$ is the velocity of the ejecta, and we have used the common notation $Q_x = Q/10^x$ in c.g.s units. Once the blast wave starts decelerating, it follows the Sedov-von Neumann-Taylor (ST) phase (e.g., \citealp{taylor46}). The blast wave radius, $R$, and velocity $v$ in this phase are
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{R_ST}
R &\approx& 4.3 \times 10^{19} {\rm cm} \, (E_{\rm 51}/n_0)^{1/5} t_4^{2/5}, \\
v &\approx& 570 \, {\rm km/s} \, (E_{\rm 51}/n_0)^{1/5} t_4^{-3/5},
\label{v_ST}
\end{eqnarray}
where $t$ is the observed time since the explosion in units of $10^4$ yr. Since we are interested in nearby galaxies,
we assume $z=0$ for the cosmological redshift.

Fermi acceleration predicts that the accelerated particle distribution follows a power-law distribution in momentum with slope $p$. For blast wave velocities of typical SNRs and for $2<p<3$, the bulk of the electron energy is contributed by mildly relativistic particles with Lorentz factor of $\sim 2$ (see \citealp{granotetal06, sironiandgiannios13}). The synchrotron emission for an observed frequency $\nu$, where max($\nu_a$,$\nu_m$) $< \nu < \nu_c$, and $\nu_a$, $\nu_m$ and $\nu_c$ are the synchrotron self-absorption, minimum injection and cooling frequencies, respectively, is \citep{sironiandgiannios13}
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{\nu} \approx (80 \, {\rm mJy}) \bar{\epsilon}_{e,-1} \epsilon_{B,-2}^{\frac{1+p}{4}} E_{\rm 51}^{\frac{11+p}{10}} n_0^{\frac{3+3p}{20}} t_{\rm 4}^{\frac{-3(1+p)}{10}} \nu_{\rm GHz}^{\frac{1-p}{2}} d_{\rm 23.5}^{-2},
\label{F_DN}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\bar{\epsilon}_e \equiv 4 \epsilon_e (p-2)/(p-1)$, $d$ is the luminosity distance and the prefactor is strictly valid only for $p\approx2.4$.

As pointed out in \cite{barniolduranandgiannios15}, if the size (here and throughout ``size" refers to the radius $R$ or diameter $D$ of the remnant) of the radio SNR is known, then one can use equation (\ref{R_ST}) to solve for the unknown external density and then substitute it in equation (\ref{F_DN}). This yields
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{\nu} \approx (70 \, {\rm mJy}) \bar{\epsilon}_{e,-1} \epsilon_{B,-2}^{\frac{1+p}{4}} E_{\rm 51}^{\frac{5+p}{4}} \Big(\frac{D}{30 \, {\rm pc}}\Big)^{-\frac{3+3p}{4}} \nu_{\rm GHz}^{\frac{1-p}{2}} d_{\rm 23.5}^{-2},
\label{F_DN_2}
\end{eqnarray}
which is analogous to equation (12) in \cite{barniolduranandgiannios15}.
This equation is independent of both the external density and the time since the explosion, which are the two largely unknown quantities.

In deriving the last expression, we assumed a constant density medium. This assumption is not essential.
A similar analysis can be carried out in the case of an external medium which follows a power-law density
in radius with $\propto R^{-k}$. Again, equation (\ref{F_DN_2}) is obtained. Therefore, for given microphysical parameters and SN energy, the SNR flux in the ST phase is
\begin{equation}
F_{\nu} \propto E^{(5+p)/4} D^{-(3+3p)/4} \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, \text{During the ST phase}.
\end{equation}
A specific SNR in the ST phase with energy $E$ evolves along a well-defined curve in the flux-size diagram, which follows equation (\ref{F_DN_2}). For a given size, the more energetic the SN, the brighter its emission; conversely, a less energetic SN will have weaker emission, see Fig. \ref{fig1}.

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[trim=3cm 3cm 6cm 3cm,clip=true,width=7.5cm]{Diagram.png}
\caption{Flux-size diagram of a radio SNR. The SNR increases in flux and size during the coasting phase (dashed thick arrow).  For a given external density, the SNR will start decelerating, that is, enter the ST phase somewhere in the thin dotted curve.  The precise location within this curve depends on the SNR energy. As an example, a SNR with energy $E_{\rm min} < E' < E_{\rm max}$ starts the ST phase in the thick dot and will travel along the solid thick arrow as its size increases and its radio flux decreases. A SNR with the largest ($E_{\rm max}$) or smallest ($E_{\rm min}$) energy among SNRs in the same galaxy, will travel along the thin dashed lines, respectively. The SNR follows its respective ST curve until it reaches the radiative phase (end of ST phase, dash-dotted line), which depends on the external density. See  the text in Section \ref{Toy_model} for details.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}

Although equation (\ref{F_DN_2}) directly connects observables to the shock microphysical parameters, it is only valid in the ST phase. As mentioned above, the ST phase commences after the SNR reaches $R_{\rm dec}$, which does depend on external density. Thus, solving for energy in equation (\ref{R_dec}) and substituting in equation (\ref{F_DN_2}) would yield the maximum radio flux for a SNR for a given density $n$, since afterwards the SNR would increase in size but decrease in flux.  This maximum radio flux is
\begin{equation}
F_{\nu} \propto n^{(5+p)/4} D^3 \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, \text{Start of ST phase,}
\end{equation}
as expected, since the flux during the coasting phase increases as $\propto R^3$ as the external medium collected increases in the same manner.  Therefore, a specific SNR that lives in a specific curve of a flux-size diagram starts its ST life in the curve of maximum flux described in this paragraph, see Fig. \ref{fig1}, thus providing a limit on the validity of equation (\ref{F_DN_2}).

The ST phase transitions to a ``radiative" phase, where the blast wave slows down sufficiently that the cooling time of the shock-heated gas becomes less than the age of SNR (e.g., \citealp{blondinetal98}).  The cooling time is given by
\begin{equation}
t_{\rm cool} \approx \frac{3 k_B T}{2 n_{{\rm sh}} \Lambda(T)},
\end{equation}
where $T$ is the temperature behind the shock, $n_{{\rm sh}} = 4 n$ is the density behind the shock, $\Lambda(T)$ is the cooling function at temperature $T$ and $k_B$ is Boltzmann's constant. The temperature behind the shock is
\begin{equation}
T = \frac{2 (\gamma - 1)}{(\gamma+1)^2} \frac{m_p v^2}{k_B} \approx 3 \times 10^6 {\rm K} \, (E_{51}/n_0)^{2/5} t_4^{-6/5},
\end{equation}
where we used equation (\ref{v_ST}) and $\gamma=5/3$.
For an $\sim 1/3$ solar metallicity (average value for MCs, e.g., \citealp{russellandbessell1989}) and $T\sim~10^6$ K, the cooling function/temperature dependence can be approximated by $\Lambda \approx 6 \times 10^{-23} \, {\rm erg \, cm^3 \, s^{-1}} \, T_6^{-1}$ (e.g., \citealp{sutherlandanddopita93}).
The time when $t_{cool} \approx t$ yields the ``radiative" time, $t_{\rm rad}$, when the SNR enters the radiative phase and the size of the SNR is $R_{\rm rad}$; these are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{t_rad}
t_{\rm rad} &\approx& 2.5 \times 10^4 \, {\rm yr} \, E_{51}^{4/17} n_0^{-9/17}, \\
R_{\rm rad} &\approx& 6.2 \times 10^{19} {\rm cm} \, E_{51}^{5/17} n_0^{-7/17},
\label{R_rad}
\end{eqnarray}
and $R_{\rm rad}$ is the maximum size of a remnant in the ST regime. For a specific energy, SNRs in higher densities turn radiative faster than in lower densities, since the blast decelerates faster.

We can now place another limit on equation (\ref{F_DN_2}), since a SNR will not be able to grow in the ST phase forever.  We can solve for energy in equation (\ref{R_rad}) and substitute it in equation (\ref{F_DN_2}). This yields a limiting flux for the ST phase for a given density $n$, which is
\begin{equation}
F_{\nu} \propto n^{(35+7p)/20} D^{(35+p)/10} \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, \text{End of ST phase,}
\label{End_of_ST_phase}
\end{equation}
and this curve marks the end of the ST phase, see Fig. \ref{fig1}. We will assume that the SNR radio flux turns off soon after reaching the radiative stage.  This assumption will be justified for the particular case of the MCs in Section \ref{Applications}.

\section{Sample} \label{Sample}

We consider radio SNRs for which a radio flux and diameter measurement has been obtained. We focus on SNRs with radio non-thermal emission that emit in the optically thin region, that is, their specific flux spectrum is negative.  We are interested in explaining the distribution of radio fluxes and diameters in a specific galaxy. For this purpose, we use the sample in BMD10 (ignoring misidentified objects, \citealp{maggietal16}; and also coasting-phase-SNR 1987A), which includes all radio SNRs detected in the MCs: the Large MC (LMC, at 50 kpc) and the Small MC (SMC, at 60 kpc). The sample consists of 71 radio SNRs. For the MCs, the inferred SN rate is 1 SN every $t_{\rm SN} = 200-500$ yr (e.g., \citealp{maozandbadenes10}). Although SNR sizes are available at different wavelengths, and sizes determined at different wavelengths might disagree (e.g., \citealp{filipovicetal05}), we use the sizes as reported in BMD10. The radio observational limit of the sample lies well below the observed fluxes indicating that most radio SNRs are observed (BMD10). In principle, the technique developed below could be applied to other samples of radio SNRs in other galaxies.

\section{Constraining the microphysical parameters} \label{Applications}

Using the theory in the previous section, we can attempt to explain the radio SNR data in BMD10. We assume that these SNRs are in the ST phase, and that their flux decreases rapidly right after entering the radiative phase, that is, they essentially disappear. This can be justified the following way (see BMD10 for similar arguments, and also \citealp{fusco84,bandiera10}). A SNR spends approximately $t_{\rm dec} \sim$ 200 yr in the coasting phase, therefore, for a SN occurring every $t_{\rm SN} \sim$ 300 yr, we expect $\lae 1$ SNR to be coasting.  For the ST phase, which lasts for $t_{\rm rad} \sim 3 \times 10^4$ yr, we expect $\sim 100$ SNRs; whereas for the radiative phase, which lasts $\sim 10^6$ yr, we expect $\sim$ 3000 SNRs. We can see that coasting SNRs are too few to account for observations. Radiative SNRs are too many (and therefore must be radio faint). Our expected number of SNRs in the ST phase agrees well with the observed number of SNRs.

As discussed above and evident from equation (\ref{F_DN_2}) the radio flux in the optically thin regime and observed frequency $\nu$ that satisfies max($\nu_a$,$\nu_m$) $< \nu < \nu_c$ (satisfied for typical SN parameters) depends only on microphysical parameters and on energy.  As a zeroth order exercise, let us fix the energy range of SNe from observations and that way we can constrain $\epsilon_e \epsilon_B^{(p+1)/4}$. \cite{hamuy03} finds that core-collapse SNe (including both Type II and Type Ib/c) show a distribution of energy from 0.5 to 8 foe (1 foe = $10^{51}$ erg), not including hypernovae, which show even larger energies; Type Ia SN energy is also within these bounds. Using these minimum and maximum values we can calculate the curves of minimum and maximum fluxes with equation (\ref{F_DN_2}), see Fig. \ref{fig1}. We can compare these with the observations in BMD10, where most of the fluxes are at 1.4 GHz and both the LMC and SMC data have been combined to provide a complete picture of the MCs.  We show our results in Fig. \ref{fig2} for $\epsilon_{e,-1} = \epsilon_{B,-2} =1$ and $p=2.4$. It is encouraging that for the given microphysics and the range of observed SN energies, only 15\% of the data points lie outside of our theoretical bounds. This suggests that the spread in fluxes stems from the range of SN energy, while the microphysical parameters: $\epsilon_e \epsilon_B^{(p+1)/4}$, see equation (\ref{F_DN_2}), might be a constant value for all SNRs in consideration.

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{Radio_flux_limits.png}
\caption{Radio flux density of SNRs (most of them at 1.4 GHz) in the MCs versus their size (data from BMD10). The LMC and SMC data are shown in red circles and blue squares, respectively. The SMC fluxes have been scaled to the distance of the LMC.  The red dotted line indicates the 5$\sigma$ radio limit for the selection of candidate SNRs in the LMC (the one for the SMC has been deleted for clarity, although it is a factor of $\sim 3$ larger).  The black dashed curves (bottom-left and upper-right) show the predicted radio fluxes of our model for the observed range of SN energies of $E_{\rm min} = 0.5$ and $E_{\rm max} = 8$ foe, respectively \protect\citep{hamuy03}. Choosing microphysical parameters $\epsilon_{e,-1} = \epsilon_{B,-2} =1$ and $p=2.4$ yields SNRs limiting fluxes that encompass the majority of the data. The largest SNR is DEM L203, recently categorized as an unconfirmed candidate \protect\citep{maggietal16}.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}

\section{Monte Carlo simulations} \label{Monte_Carlo}

To model the entire population of SNRs in a particular galaxy, we develop a Monte Carlo scheme that follows the population of SNRs throughout the galaxy's history. We assume that there is a SN in the galaxy under consideration every $t_{\rm SN}$ (in years). We can move back in time, and the {\it i}th SN took place $t = i \, t_{\rm SN}$ years ago (remnant's age). We consider SNRs older than $\sim 2 t_{\rm SN}$, so that we ignore of the order of $\sim 1$ SNR in the coasting phase. We consider SNRs as old as $10^3 t_{\rm SN}$; although, this number is unimportant as long as it is very large, since for large values of $i$, the remnants are so old that they are in their radio-faint radiative stage.

For every SN, we use a Monte Carlo scheme to randomly choose its external density and its energy from a distribution. For the external density, we assume a probability distribution $P(n) \propto n^{-1}$ as found in BMD10. We allow the minimum and maximum values of density to be $n_{\rm min} \sim 0.1$ to $n_{\rm max} \sim 10$ cm$^{-3}$. The SN energy is chosen to have a maximum probability at $E'=10^{51}$ erg, and we construct a distribution of the form $P(E) = \exp(-0.7(\ln(E/E'))^2)$, so that the probability of obtaining a SN with $>10^{52}$ erg or $<10^{50}$ erg is less than 2\%.

For each chosen SN energy and density, we calculate the corresponding radiative time, equation (\ref{t_rad}). During the radiative phase the radio flux decreases rapidly, therefore, $t_{\rm rad}$ serves as an upper limit for the age of the remnant (if the remnant age is older than $t_{\rm rad}$ the SNR is assumed not to be detectable in the radio, see Section \ref{Applications}).  Therefore, if $t < t_{\rm rad}$ we record the radio flux and size of the SNR, which can be calculated with equations (\ref{F_DN_2}) (or \ref{F_DN}) and (\ref{R_ST}), respectively.

With this procedure, we can populate the flux-size diagram of the MCs. For all SNRs we fix the microphysical parameters to $\epsilon_{e,-1} = \epsilon_{B,-2} = 1$ and $p=2.4$. We find that a density range from $n_{\rm min} \sim 0.2$ cm$^{-3}$ to $n_{\rm max} \sim 10$ cm$^{-3}$ and $t_{\rm SN} \approx 320$ yr yields good agreement with the data, see Fig. \ref{fig3}. To provide a more comprehensive comparison, we present three histograms in Fig. \ref{fig4}. As can be seen in Figs. \ref{fig3} and \ref{fig4}, our simple model is able to provide a overall explanation for the flux-size distributions in the MCs for fixed microphysics. With the values used, we constrained the microphysical parameters to be $\epsilon_e \epsilon_B^{0.85} \sim 2 \times 10^{-3}$. Below we provide some analytical estimates, which support the choice of parameters.

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm]{Radio_flux_MonteCarlo.png}
\caption{Same data as in Fig. \ref{fig2}. Here, the green crosses indicate the result of our Monte Carlo calculation. We have used $\epsilon_{e,-1} = \epsilon_{B,-2} =1$, $p=2.4$, a probability distribution of external density $n$ that is $\propto n^{-1}$ with density from $0.2-10$ cm$^{-3}$, and a probability distribution for SN energy that peaks at $10^{51}$ erg, see Section \ref{Applications}. We have assumed that a SN appears every $t_{\rm} \approx 320$ yr in the MCs (e.g., \citealp{maozandbadenes10}).}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}

\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm]{Histogram1_2.png}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm]{Histogram3.png}
\caption{The result of our Monte Carlo calculation (green crosses in Fig. \ref{fig3}) is displayed (light green) along with the data from the LMC and SMC (light gray with black edges) as histograms of sizes (top panel), cumulative sizes (inset) and the radio fluxes (bottom panel), respectively. The darker green regions indicate the overlap between the observed data and the results of our Monte Carlo calculation.}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}

The results of our Monte Carlo simulations can be understood analytically as follows.  At the end of the ST phase, equation (\ref{End_of_ST_phase}) gives a lower bound to the radio flux. This limit depends on density, so choosing the minimum density $n_{\rm min}$ yields the absolute minimum bound of the ST stage. Since there are only $< 100$ SNRs, this lower limit will be seldom reached with our Monte Carlo calculation (``small" number statistics), so the limit of equation (\ref{End_of_ST_phase}) with $n_{\rm min}$ will be larger by a factor of $\sim 2$. This limit should be smaller than the flux of the largest SNR (see Fig. \ref{fig2}). This constrain yields
\begin{equation}
n_{\rm min} \lae 0.2 \, {\rm cm^{-3}} \epsilon_{e,-1}^{-0.4} \epsilon_{B,-2}^{-0.3} \Big(\frac{F_{\nu}}{0.24 \, {\rm Jy}}\Big)^{0.4} \Big(\frac{D}{160 \, {\rm pc}}\Big)^{-1.4},
\end{equation}
which justifies our density lower limit\footnote{The claim of completeness in BMD10 has recently been put into question (e.g., \citealp{reidetal2015}; \citealp{filipovicandbozzetto2016}). Discovery of fainter SNRs would point to a smaller value of $n_{\rm min}$.}. Since increasing microphysical parameters increases the flux, if we want to maintain the lower bound to the radio flux fixed, then $n_{\rm min}$ should decrease correspondingly.

In addition, the total number of SNRs in the ST phase can be estimated by knowing the amount of time spent in the ST phase, $t_{\rm rad}$, and the SN rate, as
\begin{equation}
N_{\rm tot} \approx \frac{t_{\rm rad}}{t_{\rm SN}} \approx \frac{2.5 \times 10^4 {\rm yr} \, E_{\rm 51}^{4/17} \bar{n}^{-9/17}}{320 \, {\rm yr}} \sim  70,
\end{equation}
where we used $E_{\rm 51} \sim 1$ and we approximate $\bar{n} = \sqrt{n_{\rm min} n_{\rm max}}$ using $n_{\rm min} \sim 0.2$ cm$^{-3}$ and $n_{\rm max} \sim 10$ cm$^{-3}$. Since a constrain in $n_{\rm min}$ was set above, the previous equation roughly sets a limit on $n_{\rm max}$. We find that $N_{\rm tot}$ agrees well with the results of our Monte Carlo calculation (which is $N_{\rm tot}=78$ SNRs), and also with the observed number of SNRs in the Clouds.

\section{Discussions and Conclusions}

We have studied the population of radio SNRs in the MCs using a simple model to explain their sizes and fluxes. Based on the SN rate in the Clouds, we expect $\sim 100$ SNRs to be in the ST phase, whereas we expect $\sim$ 3000 SNRs in the radiative stage.  Given that the observed sample of radio SNRs are all much brighter than the estimated sensitivity of the radio surveys used, and that the observed number of SNRs is $\lae 100$, it seems that SNRs in the radiative stage are radio faint and that most of the SNRs in the Clouds are in the ST phase (see BMD10).

In the ST phase, the radio flux of a SNR only depends on its size, microphysical parameters and SN kinetic energy.  It is independent of the external density and the time since the explosion \citep{barniolduranandgiannios15}. Therefore, measuring the SNR size yields a constrain on microphysical parameters that depends solely on SN energy.  The SN energy (of Type Ia, Type II and Type Ib/c SNe), expected to be $10^{51}$ erg, shows a spread that seems to span from 0.5 to 8 foe (e.g., \citealp{hamuy03}). This spread in energy allows for a spread in fluxes, which is roughly consistent with the observed values in the MCs if we fix the microphysical parameters to be $\epsilon_e \epsilon_B^{0.85} \sim 2 \times 10^{-3}$.

The time of the transition of a SNR to the radiative stage depends on the external density. Since most of the observed SNRs appear to be in the ST phase, the lack of SNRs below a certain radio flux seem to suggest that this is due to their transition to the radiative phase (see BMD10). Knowledge of the external density is necessary to quantify this transition.  For this purpose, we make use of the findings of BMD10 that the probability distribution of external densities in the Clouds varies as $P(n) \propto n^{-1}$. Using this density distribution, the inferred SN rate at the MCs and our flux model, we can explain the distribution of observed fluxes and sizes in the MCs with the same microphysical parameters for all SNRs as mentioned above. This in turn implies that $P(n)$ should extend from $n_{\rm min} \sim 0.1$ to $n_{\rm max} \sim 10$ cm$^{-3}$ in the MCs. We have provided a procedure to populate SNR flux-size diagrams, which might be used to explain the data of other galaxies. Equally important, we have constrained the microphysical parameters for a large number of radio SNR.

Most of the model parameters are directly constrained by observations. Given the SN rate, the total number of observed SNRs, and realistic probability distributions of external density and SN energy, it appears that the microphysics parameters satisfy $\epsilon_e \epsilon_B^{0.85} \sim 2 \times 10^{-3}$. Although the values of $\epsilon_e$ and $\epsilon_B$ cannot be separately determined with our method, assuming that the shock downstream is in equipartition between non-thermal electrons and magnetic field $\epsilon_e \sim \epsilon_B$, one can infer $\epsilon_e \sim 0.03$, i.e., $\sim 3$\% if the dissipated energy at the shock goes into $\sim 1$~MeV electrons.\footnote{Radio SNe are routinely modeled at the very early phases of their life ($\lae$ months time-scale) within synchrotron emission from the SN blast wave and similar values for microphysics parameters have been found (e.g., \citealp{chevalierandfransson06}).} A smaller fraction $\epsilon_e (m_e/m_p)^{p-2}\sim 10^{-3}$ of the energy is injected into electrons with energy $\sim$ GeV. Assuming that $\sim 10$\% of the energy goes into non-thermal protons, the inferred electron-to-proton injection ratio at $\gae$ GeV energies is $K_{\rm ep}\sim 0.01$. This value is in agreement with the observed cosmic ray composition at Earth (e.g., \citealp{meyer69,picozzaetal13}). On the other hand, if we assume equipartition between the non-thermal protons and magnetic field, $\epsilon_p \sim \epsilon_B \sim 0.2$, then one finds $\epsilon_e \sim 0.008$ and $K_{\rm ep} \sim 0.002$ in agreement with particle-in-cell simulations (e.g., \citealp{parketal15}) and modeling of young SNRs at X-rays and GeV energies (e.g., \citealp{volketal05}).

For a typical SNR size of $D \sim 30$ pc (see Fig. \ref{fig4}), the magnetic field $B^2/8\pi = \epsilon_B 2 n m_p v^2$ is $B \sim 60 \epsilon_{B,-2}^{1/2} \, \mu$G, see equations (\ref{R_ST}) and (\ref{v_ST}). Given that the magnetic field in the MCs is $\sim 1 \, \mu$G (e.g., \citealp{gaensleretal05, maoetal08}), it appears that the amplification needed in MCs SNRs is by a factor of $\gae 10$, although we cannot constrain $\epsilon_B$ uniquely. Interestingly, a similar amplification factor has been found for gamma-ray burst relativistic shocks (e.g., \citealp{barniolduran14, santanaetal14}).

There are hints that the assumption of constant microphysical parameters for all SNRs is over-simplistic. For instance, our simulations produce a few too many bright, young remnants and slightly underproduce the flux of large old ones. This may indicate that particle acceleration tends to be {\it more} efficient for lower remnant speeds. Nevertheless, our simple model provides a powerful diagnostics of particle acceleration and magnetic field amplification in SNRs.

\section*{Acknowledgements}

We thank Laura Chomiuk, Pawan Kumar, Brian Metzger and Lorenzo Sironi for useful discussions. We acknowledge support from NASA grant NNX16AB32G.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaArXiv


text:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE locale SYSTEM "../../../../../lib/pkp/dtd/locale.dtd">

<locale name="es_ES" full_name="Español (España)">
	<message key="plugins.citationFormats.abnt.displayName">Complemento de Formato de Citas ABNT</message>
	<message key="plugins.citationFormats.abnt.citationFormatName">ABNT</message>
	<message key="plugins.citationFormats.abnt.description">Este complemento implementa el formato de citas ABNT.</message>
	<message key="plugins.citationFormats.abnt.retrieved"><![CDATA[Disponible en: <{$url}>. Fecha de acceso: {$retrievedDate}]]></message>
</locale>

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


KTXA is a television station in Fort Worth, TX that serves the Dallas - Ft. Worth television market. The station runs Independent programming and identifies itself as "TXA 21". KTXA is a digital full-power television station that operates with 750 kilowatts of power and is owned by CBS Corporation.


Need a break - or a little adventure? Whether you are looking for a quick weekend getaway, or want to go around the world, we've got you covered. Give us a call or send an email to begin planning your perfect trip.
Want us to call you? Just fill out the form below, and we'll be in touch! Please advise which agent you wish to contact you: Judy or Kim.


I've had fun in my craft room today playing with the Simply Banner Kit from Stampin' Up! It was so easy to create some beautiful banners.
First of all I re-created the "Joy" banner from page 13 of the Stampin' Up! Holiday Catalogue. We'll be making this banner in my class on November 16th. For this banner I added the Christmas Banner Simply Created Accessory Kit to add some bling. So easy. The Banner kit comes with all of the stencils you need including alphabet letters. For this banner I used the Stampin' Spritzer and made my own colours with the Re-inkers and Rubbing Alcohol (about 5-10 drops of colour and fill the rest of the spritzer with alcohol). It was a bit messy (I'm sure the colour will come out of my hands in a day or two), so I suggest you use some rubber gloves.
Now, on to some of the other projects I made - in less than 3 hours I had 3 banners made! How easy is that. The next one is a simple one - no embellishments except some Smoky Slate Chevron ribbon. I used Pool Party coloured spritzer for this one. This one is for a friend of mine who has just moved back to Vancouver after being away and is renting a place. I thought this might cheer up her place a bit.
For my last banner, I decided that my hands were coloured enough so I used ink pads and sponge daubers to apply the colour with the stencils. The colour is a little darker when you do it this way, but I think it might be a little easier. This banner will go in my craft room which I've gradually been organizing with new shelves and ways to store my supplies.
The colours I used are all In Colours - all of the new ones from this year as well ans Summer Starfruit. The embellishments on this one are using the Flower Shop stamp set and coordinating punch and the Potpourri Papillion stamp set and coordinating Elegant Butterfly Punch and Bitty Butterfly Punch, a few rhinestones and some Smoky Slate Chevron Ribbon. I stamped using the same colours as the pennants and applied using a dimensional. Here's an upclose look at a couple of the embellishments.
For more information and to register for my "Joy" Banner class, click here.
You can order a Simply Created Banner Kit by shopping on my Online Store (don't forget to use U6TW4492 when ordering) or by emailing me.
Happy stamping and Banner making!
Oh my Goodness, I'm loving it!


text:
Enjoy Nordjylland
Aalborg Historical Museum
At Aalborg Historical Museum, plenty of exciting experiences await you and your family. Explore the great history of Aalborg city, and there will also be plenty of fun activities for the whole family.
At Aalborg Historical Museum you can experience Aalborg's fascinating story, going all the way back to when the city was founded 1200 years ago.
Aalborg Historical Museum focuses on the story of Aalborg and its surroundings during the last 1000 years. The earliest findings originate from a thorough excavation conducted by the museum itself in 2007-2008, where archaeologists carefully scrutinized 4 meters of soil. Another particular attraction is Aalborgstuen (the Aalborg livingroom) from 1602 - the best preserved piece of Bourgeois Renaissance interior in the country.
The exhibition even includes the 20th century, a time when Aalborg was a blossoming industrial town. Back then, Aalborg was home to many factories, producing a broad array of items, including shoes, ice cream, brooms and TVs – all of which can be experienced at the museum.
Many Activities
All year round, Aalborg Historical Museum arranges many different activities, including guided tours, a book fair, Mill days, beer tasting, activities for children and much more.
Read more about Aalborg Historical Museum here...
Come meet us:
Read magazine
Download the app GoVisit
Futher info
Enjoy Nordjylland © 2023


Ginseng is an herb that has long been used in Chinese medicine that has remarkable properties for health . However , when the ginseng is not only famous in the east , but the efficacy of ginseng have been gliding high in western countries . Ginseng is a type of natural medicine and is highly recommended to be used to maintain a stable and healthy body . ginseng found in various types , such as Indian ginseng , Siberia , Asia , Brazil , and the United States .
Blood sugar levels can drop drastically by consuming ginseng . However , if you are using antidiabetic drugs , it is necessary to reconsider the use of ginseng simultaneously . Because the mixing ginseng with diabetes drugs can make blood sugar levels are too low . Therefore, it is very necessary advice of a doctor .
Ginseng can improve mental alertness , while also changing the mood and relieve fatigue . Another benefit is a concoction of antidepressants and anti - anxiety . When a person experiences excessive stress , adrenal hormones ( cortisol , adrenaline , and noradrenaline ) will flow out and cause a variety of health problems . In this situation , ginseng can help you in balancing the level of adrenaline .
Some experts say ginseng herbal medicine can improve the quality of life . Adaptogenic properties of ginseng help stimulate people to stay young . Whereas in the elderly , can restore damaged cells in the body . Ginseng can also help you fight off the flu and other infectious diseases .
The growth of certain types of cancer cells can be inhibited by ginseng . Chinese Medicine Journal report , ginsenosides have anti - tumor effect and can induce cell damage in prostate cancer , ovarian cancer cells , lung adenocarcinoma cells , and neuroblastoma cells . In addition , ginseng also acts to inhibit cell cycle progression , so as to slow the growth of cancer cells .
Great adaptogenic from various strains of Ginseng is believed to provide physiological changes in the body to adapt to fatigue due to overwork.
Quality ginseng in improving stamina has made it a tonic stimulant popular among athletes . During practice , an athlete must be consistent in order to maintain stamina remain high , and ginseng can help to make it happen .
The use of ginseng is not recommended especially for pregnant women and breast-feeding , to prevent the occurrence of contraindications . In addition , ginseng may also affect the reaction of some drugs , such as blood thinners such as warfarin , heparin , aspirin , and diuretics .


Then I cloned my repository locally to ensure that I didn't break something.
It then asks you how different branches should be named. I just let their names. Ok, so now my work starts in the develop branch, where all major development happens. The master branch is the production branch.
This approach should also greatly help when working in teams on different features, to keep always a running version in the master branch, that everybody can check out and start working right away.


The Finnish Minister of Housing and Communications, Krista Kiuru, has presented the Government's draft strategy for the future of television. For television viewers, perhaps the most important news is that under the strategy, it would be possible to use traditional television sets for receiving programmes of the Finnish Broadcasting Company (YLE) and the principal commercial channels until 2026.
Two of the television multiplexes would be allocated to YLE and the principal commercial channels. One of the two multiplexes would continue broadcasting using existing technology until 2026, while most of the other multiplexes would switch to high-definition technology in 2017.


text:
I was kaiser Bill's batman is een melodietje geschreven door Roger Greenaway en Roger Cook. Zij voerden het nooit zelf uit, ze waren "slechts"  muziekschrijvers die echter tientallen hits op hun naam hebben staan (o.a. voor The Hollies). Zo is ook het geval met dit simpele wijsje. De bekendste versie is van ene Whistling Jack Smith, die niet verder kwam dan een langspeelplaat. Er verschenen talloze covers, daaronder versies van James Last (Ich war der Putzer von Kaiser), Klaus Wunderlich en Pat Boone.

"Kaiser Bill" staat voor Wilhelm II van Duitsland, "batman" voor ordonnans. Het melodietje lijkt dan ook op een marsdeuntje. Wilhelm II was een van de hoofdrolspelers in de aanloop naar de Eerste Wereldoorlog.

Whistling Jack Smith

De artiest Whistling Jack Smith bestond echter niet echt. In de geluidsstudio was het de trompettist John O'Neill uit de musici rondom Mike Sammes. Op de beeldbuis werd hij gespeeld door Billy Moeller, de broer van Tommy Moeller, lid van Unit 4+2. De artiestennaam is wel afgeleid van een echte artiest: Whispering Jack Smith.

Hitnotering
In de Verenigde Staten haalde het de twintigste plaats in de Billboard Hot 100, de elpee waar het op stond werd dan ook naar de single genoemd. In de Britse UK Singles Chart had het meer succes: twaalf weken notering met een hoogste plaats nummer 5. De Nederlandse top 40 versloeg die Britse notering echter met gemak: Vijftien weken notering en een tweede plaats. Bill's batman kon alleen afgestopt worden door This is my song van Petula Clark.

Nederlandse Top 40

Nederlandse Hilversum 3 Top 30

Belgische BRT Top 30
Deze lijst was er nog niet.

Vlaamse voorloper Ultratop 30

Radio 2 Top 2000

Single uit 1967
Compositie van Roger Cook
Compositie van Roger Greenaway
Nummer van Whistling Jack Smith

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Das Roc (Einheitenzeichen: roc) war ein 1964 vorgeschlagene Name für die Einheit der elektrischen Leitfähigkeit im CGS-System, abgeleitet von den Anfangsbuchstaben der englischen Bezeichnung für die Einheit Ω−1·cm−1 reciprocal ohm centimeter.

Quellen
François Cardarelli: Scientific Unit Conversion. A Practical Guide to Metrication, Springer Verlag, London 1997, S. 123.
H. G. Jerrard & D. B. McNeill: A Dictionary of Scientific Units. Including dimensionless numbers and scales, Chapman und Hall, London/New York, 1986, S. 119.

CGS-Einheit