Searching for Fast Optical Transients using VERITAS Cherenkov Telescopes

Astronomical transients are intrinsically interesting things to study. Fast optical transients (microsecond timescale) are a largely unexplored field of optical astronomy mainly due to the fact that large optical telescopes are oversubscribed. Furthermore, most optical observations use instruments with integration times on the order of seconds and are thus unable to resolve fast transients. Current-generation atmospheric Cherenkov gamma-ray telescopes, however, have huge collecting areas (e.g., VERITAS, which consists of four 12-m telescopes), larger than any existing optical telescopes, and time is typically available for such studies without interfering with gamma-ray observations. The following outlines the benefits of using a Cherenkov telescope to detect optical transients and the implementation of the VERITAS Transient Detector (TRenDy), a dedicated multi-channel photometer based on field-programmable gate arrays. Data are presented demonstrating the ability of TRenDy to detect transient events such as a star passing through its field of view and the optical light curve of a pulsar

Breaking of Josephson junction oscillations and onset of quantum turbulence in Bose-Einstein condensates

We analyse the formation and the dynamics of quantum turbulence in a two-dimensional Bose-Einstein condensate with a Josephson junction barrier modeled using the Gross-Pitaevskii equation. We show that a sufficiently high initial superfluid density imbalance leads to randomisation of the dynamics and generation of turbulence, namely, the formation of a quasi-1D dispersive shock consisting of a train of grey solitons that eventually breakup into chains of distinct quantised vortices of alternating vorticity followed by random turbulent flow. The Josephson junction barrier allows us to create two turbulent regimes: acoustic turbulence on one side and vortex turbulence on the other. Throughout the dynamics, a key mechanism for mixing these two regimes is the transmission of vortex dipoles through the barrier: we analyse this scattering process in terms of the barrier parameters, sound emission and vortex annihilation. Finally, we discuss how the vortex turbulence evolves for long times, presenting the optimal configurations for the density imbalance and barrier height in order to create the desired turbulent regimes which last as long as possible

Analyzing Alternative Spaces: Queer Social Networks and Notions of Belonging in Morocco

Because of the presence of both legal and cultural discrimination in Morocco, the Moroccan queer community operates largely in secret and is unable to occupy public space. Additionally, the patriarchal structure of Moroccan society creates a culture of toxic masculinity that limits queer expression. This paper examines how queer Moroccans operate in the face of this discrimination. It also explores the extent to which alternative spaces, or spaces that subvert the norms and practices of mainstream society, contribute to the creation of LGBTQ+ social networks. Alternative spaces can be physical spaces—such as bars, cafes, and live music venues—or virtual spaces—such as websites and social media applications. This scholarly work examines whether these alternative spaces allow for a relatively greater level of queer expression, whether through nonconventional aesthetic presentation or the facilitation of queer discourse. Finally, it seeks to discover the importance of LGBTQ+ social networks in providing queer Moroccans with a sense of belonging in Morocco

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines’ Abuse of Trust Enhancement: An Argument for the Professional Discretion Approach

This Article introduces a new concept-“longitudinal guilt”-which invites readers to reconsider basic presuppositions about the way our criminal justice system determines guilt in criminal cases. In short, the idea is that a variety of features of criminal procedure, most importantly, plea bargaining, conspire to change the primary “truthfinding mission” of criminal law from one of adjudicating individual historical cases to one of identifying dangerous “offenders.” This change of mission is visible in the lower proof standards we apply to repeat criminal offenders. The first section of this Article explains how plea bargaining and graduated sentencing systems based on criminal history effectively combine to lower the standard of proof for repeat criminals. The second section describes several additional procedural and evidentiary rules that further effectively reduce the standard of proof for recidivists. The third section argues that the net effect is a criminal justice system that is primarily focused on the identification of a class of “dangerous offenders” based upon their repeated interactions with the system over time rather than the accurate resolution of specific allegations of wrongdoing in individual cases, as is conventionally supposed. In a phrase, we have moved toward a system that constructs guilt “longitudinally.” This Article concludes with a few brief thoughts on the merits and demerits of longitudinal guilt. In a national issue of first impression for the circuit courts, the Eleventh Circuit, in United States v. Louis, held that a federally licensed firearm dealer who knowingly sells a firearm to a convicted felon should not receive additional punishment for abusing a position of public or private trust under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines (Guidelines). Under Louis, a licensed firearm dealer does not occupy a position of trust as defined in Guidelines § 3B1.3. The court relied upon the limited discretion the victim-the federal government, as a representative of the people-gave to the dealer to sell firearms. Citing the government’s extensive oversight and documentation of firearm dealers, the Eleventh Circuit reasoned that highly regulated firearm dealers lack discretion on how to exercise many aspects of their businesses. Therefore, the firearm dealer lacks a position of trust. The issue is narrow in scope. Because the Guidelines provide a specific base offense level for anyone who sells a firearm to a convicted felon, a licensed dealer and a black market dealer would receive the same recommended sentence if not for the imposition of the abuse of trust enhancement under Guidelines § 3B1.3. Although the result of both crimes is a convicted felon unlawfully possessing a firearm, licensed dealers enjoy legal access and authority to import, manufacture, and deal in firearms, while unlicensed dealers lack such authority. Thus, due to the legal sanction and ease with which licensed dealers may access firearms, repeated licensed dealer violations present a greater threat to society. Why, then, does the Eleventh Circuit not hold a licensed firearm dealer, who enjoys the reliance of the community as a gatekeeper of illegal firearm disbursement, more accountable than an unlicensed citizen who enjoys no such reliance? Does such a dealer not violate public trust? If this issue had been presented to the Third Circuit, the outcome would probably differ. In a factually analogous 2009 case, United States v. Starnes, the Third Circuit subjected a subcontractor performing asbestos demolition to the abuse of trust enhancement for falsifying air monitoring reports required by the federal government. Instead of following the Eleventh Circuit’s approach-which relied exclusively on the professional discretion the victim gave the defendant-Starnes used a hybrid approach. To define a position of trust, the Starnes court considered: “‘(1) whether the position allows the defendant to commit a difficult-to-detect wrong; (2) the degree of authority which the position vests in [the] defendant vis-a-vis the object of the wrongful act; and (3) whether there has been reliance on the integrity of the person occupying the position.”’ In its conclusion, the Starnes court heavily referenced the defendant’s personal authority over the jobsite that made the defendant’s crimes difficult to detect by the victim. However, Starnes omitted analysis of the strong oversight of asbestos subcontractors exercised by the federal government through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other federal agencies. Therefore, the Starnes court failed to consider the key-and exclusive-factor in determining the existence of a position of trust-the level of discretion the victim afforded the defendant. Although the courts reached different conclusions, the facts of both cases stood very similar. Because no direct individual victim existed, the government, as a representative of the people, was the theoretical victim of both crimes. Also, both defendants (1) specialized in vocations involving dangerous products; (2) engaged in professions subject to extensive oversight by the government; (3) knowingly violated criminal regulations governing their trades; (4) enjoyed legal access to specifically regulated vocations; and (5) exercised authoritative control, as owners, over their businesses. Despite the similarities, the Eleventh and Third Circuits reached opposite conclusions. As the above cases illustrate, courts have struggled to find a consistent approach to define “position of trust.” In each case, the defendant presents to the court specific responsibilities and duties unique to his individual circumstance. Accordingly, in deciding whether to impose the enhancement, courts must look beyond the defendant’s formal title. Thus, the courts must apply an approach to enhancement determination based on the case’s facts. Currently, most circuits apply the professional discretion approach exclusively, similar to Louis. However, the Second and Fourth Circuits join the Third Circuit and employ hybrid approaches similar to Starnes. Although the courts remain divided on the issue, two circuit courts have recently refocused their attention on the commentary text of § 3B1.3 as amended in 1993, overruled their own precedent, and adopted the professional discretion approach to enhancement imposition. Because the remaining approaches rest on precedent established before the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s 1993 Amendment, the Second, Third, and Fourth Circuits should abandon their hybrid approaches and adopt the professional discretion approach exclusively. This Note analyzes the prevalent judicial approaches to § 3B1.3 and explains how some courts erred by advancing the hybrid approach after the 1993 Amendment to § 3B1.3. Part II examines the role of trust in guideline sentencing. Part III discusses the policy behind the Guidelines, including the continuing application of the Guidelines despite the Supreme Court’s 2005 United States v. Booker decision. Part IV explains different approaches employed by the circuit courts to define a position of trust. Part V highlights the effect of the approach by contrasting the Third Circuit’s hybrid with the Eleventh Circuit’s professional discretion approach. Finally, Part VI analyses the history of the enhancement and endorses the recent trend towards the application of the professional discretion approach

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines’ Abuse of Trust Enhancement: An Argument for the Professional Discretion Approach

This Article introduces a new concept-“longitudinal guilt”-which invites readers to reconsider basic presuppositions about the way our criminal justice system determines guilt in criminal cases. In short, the idea is that a variety of features of criminal procedure, most importantly, plea bargaining, conspire to change the primary “truthfinding mission” of criminal law from one of adjudicating individual historical cases to one of identifying dangerous “offenders.” This change of mission is visible in the lower proof standards we apply to repeat criminal offenders. The first section of this Article explains how plea bargaining and graduated sentencing systems based on criminal history effectively combine to lower the standard of proof for repeat criminals. The second section describes several additional procedural and evidentiary rules that further effectively reduce the standard of proof for recidivists. The third section argues that the net effect is a criminal justice system that is primarily focused on the identification of a class of “dangerous offenders” based upon their repeated interactions with the system over time rather than the accurate resolution of specific allegations of wrongdoing in individual cases, as is conventionally supposed. In a phrase, we have moved toward a system that constructs guilt “longitudinally.” This Article concludes with a few brief thoughts on the merits and demerits of longitudinal guilt. In a national issue of first impression for the circuit courts, the Eleventh Circuit, in United States v. Louis, held that a federally licensed firearm dealer who knowingly sells a firearm to a convicted felon should not receive additional punishment for abusing a position of public or private trust under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines (Guidelines). Under Louis, a licensed firearm dealer does not occupy a position of trust as defined in Guidelines § 3B1.3. The court relied upon the limited discretion the victim-the federal government, as a representative of the people-gave to the dealer to sell firearms. Citing the government’s extensive oversight and documentation of firearm dealers, the Eleventh Circuit reasoned that highly regulated firearm dealers lack discretion on how to exercise many aspects of their businesses. Therefore, the firearm dealer lacks a position of trust. The issue is narrow in scope. Because the Guidelines provide a specific base offense level for anyone who sells a firearm to a convicted felon, a licensed dealer and a black market dealer would receive the same recommended sentence if not for the imposition of the abuse of trust enhancement under Guidelines § 3B1.3. Although the result of both crimes is a convicted felon unlawfully possessing a firearm, licensed dealers enjoy legal access and authority to import, manufacture, and deal in firearms, while unlicensed dealers lack such authority. Thus, due to the legal sanction and ease with which licensed dealers may access firearms, repeated licensed dealer violations present a greater threat to society. Why, then, does the Eleventh Circuit not hold a licensed firearm dealer, who enjoys the reliance of the community as a gatekeeper of illegal firearm disbursement, more accountable than an unlicensed citizen who enjoys no such reliance? Does such a dealer not violate public trust? If this issue had been presented to the Third Circuit, the outcome would probably differ. In a factually analogous 2009 case, United States v. Starnes, the Third Circuit subjected a subcontractor performing asbestos demolition to the abuse of trust enhancement for falsifying air monitoring reports required by the federal government. Instead of following the Eleventh Circuit’s approach-which relied exclusively on the professional discretion the victim gave the defendant-Starnes used a hybrid approach. To define a position of trust, the Starnes court considered: “‘(1) whether the position allows the defendant to commit a difficult-to-detect wrong; (2) the degree of authority which the position vests in [the] defendant vis-a-vis the object of the wrongful act; and (3) whether there has been reliance on the integrity of the person occupying the position.”’ In its conclusion, the Starnes court heavily referenced the defendant’s personal authority over the jobsite that made the defendant’s crimes difficult to detect by the victim. However, Starnes omitted analysis of the strong oversight of asbestos subcontractors exercised by the federal government through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other federal agencies. Therefore, the Starnes court failed to consider the key-and exclusive-factor in determining the existence of a position of trust-the level of discretion the victim afforded the defendant. Although the courts reached different conclusions, the facts of both cases stood very similar. Because no direct individual victim existed, the government, as a representative of the people, was the theoretical victim of both crimes. Also, both defendants (1) specialized in vocations involving dangerous products; (2) engaged in professions subject to extensive oversight by the government; (3) knowingly violated criminal regulations governing their trades; (4) enjoyed legal access to specifically regulated vocations; and (5) exercised authoritative control, as owners, over their businesses. Despite the similarities, the Eleventh and Third Circuits reached opposite conclusions. As the above cases illustrate, courts have struggled to find a consistent approach to define “position of trust.” In each case, the defendant presents to the court specific responsibilities and duties unique to his individual circumstance. Accordingly, in deciding whether to impose the enhancement, courts must look beyond the defendant’s formal title. Thus, the courts must apply an approach to enhancement determination based on the case’s facts. Currently, most circuits apply the professional discretion approach exclusively, similar to Louis. However, the Second and Fourth Circuits join the Third Circuit and employ hybrid approaches similar to Starnes. Although the courts remain divided on the issue, two circuit courts have recently refocused their attention on the commentary text of § 3B1.3 as amended in 1993, overruled their own precedent, and adopted the professional discretion approach to enhancement imposition. Because the remaining approaches rest on precedent established before the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s 1993 Amendment, the Second, Third, and Fourth Circuits should abandon their hybrid approaches and adopt the professional discretion approach exclusively. This Note analyzes the prevalent judicial approaches to § 3B1.3 and explains how some courts erred by advancing the hybrid approach after the 1993 Amendment to § 3B1.3. Part II examines the role of trust in guideline sentencing. Part III discusses the policy behind the Guidelines, including the continuing application of the Guidelines despite the Supreme Court’s 2005 United States v. Booker decision. Part IV explains different approaches employed by the circuit courts to define a position of trust. Part V highlights the effect of the approach by contrasting the Third Circuit’s hybrid with the Eleventh Circuit’s professional discretion approach. Finally, Part VI analyses the history of the enhancement and endorses the recent trend towards the application of the professional discretion approach

The EU’s Eastern enlargement as an opportunity for increasing trade and socio-economic relations between the EU and New Zealand

After the signing of the New Zealand - China Free trade agreement in 2008, New Zealand’s trade withthe EU has seen less substantial growth. From being the second largest partner, the EU has becomeNew Zealand’s third largest trading partner, behind China and Australia. Moreover, the recentdeparture of the UK from the EU threatens to further downgrade the importance of the EU as NewZealand’s trade partner and its relevance in terms of tourist origin to New Zealand. On the other hand,although still marginal, New Zealand’s trade and tourist relations with the new EU member statesfrom Central and Eastern Europe have seen a remarkable expansion. Focussing on the examinationof current trends in the volume of trade and tourist exchange between New Zealand and this group ofstates, this paper assesses their importance for New Zealand - EU relations and prospects for theirfurther expansion

Adaptive Noise Cancellation System for Low Frequency Transmission of Sound in Open Fan Aircraft

This paper describes the use of a structural/acoustic model of a section of a large aircraft to help define the sensor/actuator architecture that was used in a hardware demonstration of adaptive noise cancellation. Disturbances considered were representative of propeller-induced disturbances from an open fan aircraft. Controller on and controller off results from a hardware demonstration on a portion of a large aircraft are also included. The use of the model has facilitated the development of a new testing technique, closely related to modal testing, that can be used to find good structural actuator locations for adaptive noise cancellation

Zebrafish studies identify serotonin receptors mediating antiepileptic activity in Dravet syndrome.

Dravet syndrome is a life-threatening early-onset epilepsy not well controlled by antiepileptic drugs. Drugs that modulate serotonin (5-HT) signalling, including clemizole, locaserin, trazodone and fenfluramine, have recently emerged as potential treatment options for Dravet syndrome. To investigate the serotonin receptors that could moderate this antiepileptic activity, we designed and synthesized 28 novel analogues of clemizole, obtained receptor binding affinity profiles, and performed in vivo screening in a scn1lab mutant zebrafish (Danio rerio) model which recapitulates critical clinical features of Dravet syndrome. We discovered three clemizole analogues with 5-HT receptor binding that exert powerful antiepileptic activity. Based on structure-activity relationships and medicinal chemistry-based analysis, we then screened an additional set of known 5-HT receptor specific drug candidates. Integrating our in vitro and in vivo data implicates 5-HT2B receptors as a critical mediator in the mechanism of seizure suppression observed in Dravet syndrome patients treated with 5-HT modulating drugs

An epidemic model for an evolving pathogen with strain-dependent immunity

Between pandemics, the influenza virus exhibits periods of incremental evolution via a process known as antigenic drift. This process gives rise to a sequence of strains of the pathogen that are continuously replaced by newer strains, preventing a build up of immunity in the host population. In this paper, a parsimonious epidemic model is defined that attempts to capture the dynamics of evolving strains within a host population. The ‘evolving strains’ epidemic model has many properties that lie in-between the Susceptible–Infected–Susceptible and the Susceptible–Infected–Removed epidemic models, due to the fact that individuals can only be infected by each strain once, but remain susceptible to reinfection by newly emerged strains. Coupling results are used to identify key properties, such as the time to extinction. A range of reproduction numbers are explored to characterise the model, including a novel quasi-stationary reproduction number that can be used to describe the re-emergence of the pathogen into a population with ‘average’ levels of strain immunity, analogous to the beginning of the winter peak in influenza. Finally the quasi-stationary distribution of the evolving strains model is explored via simulation