View allAll Photos Tagged analysis
Dr. Ruben Morawicki and lab technician Delmy Diaz use colorimetric analysis to determine protein content of fermented sorghum samples. Fermentation increases protein content and also makes it more available for digestion in animal feed.
Bartholomew Armah, Chief, Renewal of Planning Section, ECA addressing in the presence of Ayodele Odusola, Chief Economist and Head, Strategy and Analysis, UNDP Africa; Abdalla Hamdok, Chief Economist and Deputy Executive Secretary, ECA, and the delegates during the African Economic Conference (AEC) 2015 - Plenary Session 3 – Determinants of Poverty and Inequalities, Including Impacts on November 2, 2015, at the African Union Building and Government Hotel, in Kinshasa, the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
I wish they had had the sign made to fit into the space between the window posts -- it would be much more striking. This one is in the Oakland Park area of Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. I haven't visited - so I cannot report on the analytical use of what appears to be a fortune-telling ball depicted here.
Tony Seiniger believes in simplicity. At its base, his poster for Jaws is an advertisement to entice audiences to see Steven Spielberg’s movie. Jaws is a horror film and the poster uses the genre’s greatest trope of creating intrigue and suspense through suggestion. An inductive analysis shows that the singular focus of the shark and the unawareness of the swimmer signals an alarm in the viewer. There is no attack, but the dagger-like teeth are a code for danger and the thick, red lettering signifies blood. Both the size of the shark and the depth of the ocean make the slight swimmer insignificant, creating tension through spatial orientation. Ultimately, the poster wants you to fear this shark, but it also wants to interest you enough to buy a ticket to see Jaws in action. But he film, and the poster, also became a part of the myth of the dreaded great white shark.
Sources
“Jaws Poster.” Movieposter.com. Movieposter.com, n.d. Web. 13 Sep 2011.
“Interview with Tony Seiniger.” cnn.com. CNN, 25 Jul 2003. Web. 13 Sep 2011.
Global Water Analysis Laboratory Network (GloWAL) Event on the margins of the welcome reception of the International Symposium on Isotope Hydrology: Sustainable Water Resources in a Changing World, held at the Agency headquarters in Vienna, Austria. 4 July 2023
Photo Credit: Hannah Shaffer / IAEA
Speakers:
Najat Mokhtar, IAEA Deputy Director-General and Head of the Department of Nuclear Sciences and Applications (Host)
HE Mr Alejandro Solano Ortiz, Resident Representative of Costa Rica to the IAEA, on behalf of Group of 77 and China
HE Mr. Ian David Grainge Biggs, Resident Representative of Australia to the IAEA
HE Mr Juan Francisco Facetti, Resident Representative of Paraguay to the IAEA
Mr. Johannes Cullmann, Scientific Advisor to the President of the UN General Assembly, WMO
Full support of the entire survey cycle. Schedule a live demo today to see Q-Fi’s Survey Data Analysis Software in action. For more info please visit to:
Incheon International Airport, Terminal 1 - Incheon, Korea
HDA : Consultant for engineering and design
Client : KOACA -Korea Airport Construction authority
Architect: KACI Architects with Fentress Bradburn
Date : 1994 - 2001
See more at : www.hda-paris.com/
Orchard Road - Singapour -
HDA : Facades designer -
Client : Swire Properties LTD
Architect : Raymond Woo & Associates Architects
2009-2015
Military history is a most challenging
discipline, although at first sight it seems a
Childs play !
As I read this apology of military analysis
published in Journal of Military History of USA
I realized how true the above mentioned
premise was !
Mr Kaushik Roy who I first read in the journal
of military history thinks that he is the
19
19
greatest Bhagwan of Indo Pak military history
but makes shocking factual as well as
analytical mistakes.
As far as I understand he has mastered citing
a flood stream of references which impresses
the naieve Americans and the ultra naieve
characters, all anonymous known as referees
of Journal of Military History of USA !
20
20
What these naieve referees don’t understand
is that Kaushik Roy commits glaring mistakes
which escape the supposed sagacity of these
Super Bhagwan referees also !
Some previous examples of Roys shocking
ignorance and lack of knowledge of military
history which this scribe discovered in the
past are as below:--
21
21
1. In an article in Journal of Military
History of VMI USA which hereafter we
will abbreviate as JMH , Roy fallaciously
and without references claimed that 45 %
of the army in India.
1
2. Claimed in one of his books that
Attock was the most intensely recruited
districts is fallacious as during WW One
whereas this district was 12th in Punjab in
1Page-951- Coercion Through Leniency: British Manipulation of the CourtsMartial System in the Post-Mutiny Indian Army, 1859-1913-The Journal of
Military History Issue Number 65 (October 2001).
22
22
contributing recruits to the British Indian
Army .2
3. In another book Kaushik Roy makes a
highly fallacious and historically totally
2 Page-42-INDIAN ARMY AND THE FIRST WORLD WAR- Kaushik Roy-Oxford
University Press.
23
23
inaccurate statement like falsely claiming
that majority of British Indian Army troops
in Iraq were Muslim.3
3 Page-17 –INDIAN ARMY IN TWO WORLD WARS- Edited by Kaushik RoyBrill Books- ISBN: 978-90-04-21145-2
Publication Date: 14 Oct 2011
24
24
4. In another book he fallaciously
claimed that corps commander of
Pakistans 1 Corps in 1971 was Lt Gen
25
25
Tikka Khan , whereas this statement has
absolutely no connection with the truth .4
Roy totally misses the fact that the British
company failed to defeat the Marathas in the
First Anglo Maratha war.It is expected that
articles published in so called prime historical
journals like JMH should at least educate a
reader about basic facts ?
4 Page-108-LIMITED WAR IN SOUTH ASIA FROM DECOLONISATION TO
RECENT TIMES-Kaushik Roy and Scott Gates-Routledge -2017
26
26
A major flaw in this articles treatment of First
Sikh War of the company is that Roy totally
misses the point that Sikh Army was at par
with British East India Companys army but
was defeated simply because both of its
highest military commanders were in secret
league with the company and wanted that
the Sikh Army be destroyed as they feared it
more than the British company.This point
discussed in much detail by various British
27
27
authors including Colonel Malleson is totally
whitewashed by Roy.
ANGLO NEPAL WAR
Roys analysis of Nepal war is also factually
incorrect and a collection of sweaping
judgements which had no connection with
reality.Here Roys analysis contains the
following major analytical flaws:--
28
28
• His claim that “Due to their numerical
and firepower superiority, the British
won.”5
• Facts of Nepal war well documented in
JW Fortescues monumental “History
of British Army” which Kaushik Roy
never bothered to read or cite as well
as various first hand British account
disprove Roys assertions.
5 Page-665- Military Synthesis in South Asia: Armies, Warfare, and Indian
Society, c. 1740–1849 –Kaushik Roy-Issue Number 69 (July 2005): The
Journal of Military History -Pages -651–90.
29
29
• This was beyond the sagacity of so
called brilliant anonymous referees of
Journal of Military History of USA.
• To recap for the reader (a) British
company invaded Nepal with four
forces three of which had British and
Indian units while one had only Indian
units led off course by British officers.
(b) Three forces comprising British and
Indian units were a total failure in
1814-1815 (c) Only the fourth force
30
30
comprising Indian units only under
Major General Ochterlony was a
success (d) The British Company
therefore decided to make Ochterlony
overall commander. (e) Ochterlony
defeated the Nepalis by outflanking
manoeuvres and not by superior
manpower as Roy claims.
• The most important fact of Anglo
Nepal war that an all Indian force
outperformed three forces which
31
31
contained British troops was totally
ignored by Roy or not even known by
him.
ANGLO MYSORE WARS
32
32
The first point of contention about Anglo
Mysore wars in this article is the assertion
below:--
“Besides a transition in the polity and the
force structure, Tipu also initiated a doctrinal
shift. While Haidar Ali ravaged Britishoccupied Karnataka by conducting maneuver
warfare with the aid of his light cavalry
during 1767 and 1768, Tipu reverted to
positional warfare after his father’s death in
1781. This was because the Mysore Army
33
33
under Tipu became less mobile due to the
dominance of the infantry-artillery system.
With the help of French military engineers,
Tipu constructed a fort in his capital at
Seringapatam. The fort had a bastioned
curtain wall and the river Cauvery functioned
as the wet ditch. He adorned this fort with 929
static guns and concentrated 22,000 of his
48,000 infantry within its walls. Seringapatam
became the schwerpunkt of the British military
operation in 1799.6
6 Page-669-Ibid.
34
34
THE ABOVE WHITEWASHED STATEMENT BY
KAUSHIK ROY SUMS UP HIS BROAD
BRUSHES.
Here Kaushik Roy offers no analysis why
Tipu Sultan failed and only uses a vague
German term “Schwerpunkt”, without
actually analysing what happened.
Here there are the following flaws with
Kaushik Roys analysis which should not have
35
35
escaped the sagacity (if they had any) of the
so called referees of JMH :--
• Hyder Ali , father of Tipu Sultan followed a
superior strategy of denying logistics to
the British company which enabled him to
win First Anglo Mysore War against the
British company and draw Second Anglo
Mysore War, although Hyder died in the
middle of this war.
36
36
• Tipu abandoned his fathers superior
strategy of logistics denial which Kaushik
Roy fails to clearly bring out.
• Another most serious flaw of Roys
analysis is that the British company had
no cavalry till Second Mysore war and this
enabled Mysore to defeat the company by
denying them logistics as well as
information.By end of Second Mysore
War British company decided to raise
cavalry regiments , the most crucial
37
37
decision in the military history of British
East India Company but Kaushik Roy
totally misses this point.
• The most decisive blow on Mysore was
inflicted by the Companys Lord Cornwallis
in Third Anglo Mysore War of 1790-92
but our so called brilliant Kaushik Roy
totally fails to bring out this point in his so
called analysis !
• Kaushiks emphasis on artillery is also
superficial.Lord Cornwallis in Third Anglo
38
38
Mysore war launched an assault on Tipus
capital Seringapattam without any
artillery and actually forced Tipu to
capitulate.
• Kaushik fails to bring out that Mysore was
decisively defeated in 1792 while the
1799 war with Mysore was actually a
much trumpeted show signifying defeat of
a state which had already been eliminated
as a serious player seven years earlier in
1792.
39
39
• Kaushiks verbosity and emphasis on
artillery is totally fallacious and flawed like
when he states as below :--“ In response,
the EIC’s force became firepower heavy.
The Company’s Army deployed forty 18-
pounders for breaching the walls of
Seringapatam and seven 8- and 5.5-inch
howitzers for plunging fire inside the fort’s
walls. In addition there were fifty-seven 6-
pounders for fire support 62 for the
besieging army against Tipu’s infantry.
40
40
After Tipu’s defeat, the Marathas
challenged British power in Deccan.”7
• As earlier stated Roy totally misses the
decisive innovation by the British
company that destroys Mysorean strategy
of denying logistics to the company even
followed by Tipu, i.e introduction of
cavalry.Further Lord Cornwallis multiplied
the companys cavalry by incorporating
Hyderabad and Maratha cavalry which
7 Page-669-Ibid
41
41
increased the cavalry strength against
Mysore to over 75,000 cavalry.
• Roys claims regarding role of artillery are
totally flawed as Lord Cornwallis never
used artillery in the assault on
Seringapattam in 1792 and Tipu
surrendered without artillery breaching
his citadel seringapattams walls.
• In 1799 General Harris used artillery
purely as a matter of obstinacy and over
insurance whereas Tipu Sultan wanted to
42
42
make terms with the company. Instead
Harris on orders of Wellesley presented
such unduly humiliating terms to Tipu that
Tipu was left with no choice but to
fight.So Kaushiks trumpeting about
artillery is pure nonsense.
All we get from Kaushik Roy are massive
endnotes designed to impress the naieve
Americans of JMH but no substantial analysis
!
43
43
BATTLE OF ASSAYE
Kaushik Roys analysis of battle of Assaye is
totally superficial and shallow.
He beats about the bush discussing irrelevant
matters but totally fails to note that the
Marathas were defeated as General
Wellesley disrupted their initially brilliant war
plan by forcing them to change front.
44
44
This most famous and well known manoeuvre
totally escapes the jaundiced and faulty
perception of Kaushik Roy, which is really a
mystery ?
45
45
46
46
Kaushik Roy fails to note that the essential
reason of Maratha defeat at Assaye was
failure to modify initial war plans under the
pressure of actual circumstances of war
.Something which Germans called
“OPERATIV” and later day staff colleges and
war colleges called “OPERATIONAL
STRATEGY”.
This was totally beyond Kaushik Roys
perception !
47
47
Kaushik Roys analysis of details of battle of
Assaye is also highly fallacious.
He fails to note that HM 74th Foot suffered
excessive losses as it was launched into a
village and was fighting in built up area.
On the other hand the second British unit
suffered less losses than the Madras infantry
units.8
8 Wellesley defeated the Marathas with a Native-British army of
approximately 6000 troops out of which I ,500 were of dubious
value/reliability being Mysoreans/Marathas,while the 4,500 consisting
of British and Native troops did bulk of the fighting. The infantly
consisted of two Royal British Army regiments and five native
regiments ofthe Madras Anny,while the cavalry consisted of one Royal
48
48
British Army cavalry regiment and three Native cavalry regiments from
the Madras Army. The Maratha Army opposing Wellesley consisted of
10,500 Maratha infantry organised and disciplined on European lines
by French officers and around 40,000 irregular horse. The major
reason why the British won the victory was the future victor of
Waterloo's brilliant flank march,executed before the battle.Wellesley
was initially advancing straight towards the Marathas.A battle fought
would have enabled the Marathas to effectively utilise their numerical
superiority against the British. Wellesley exhibited tremendous coup d
oeil and decided not to attack frontally.Earlier he had been assured by
local guides that there was no ford across which Wellesley could take
his army to outflank the Marathas. He noticed two villages opposite
each other on the north and south banks of river Kaitna and assessed
that ,there must be a ford connecting the two villages. A ford was
discovered and Wellesley turned the Maratha front ,forcing them to
change their entire front and to face the British in an area in which
their numerical superiority was nullified,by virtue of frontage restricted
by two rivers flowing on each flank.British writers generally claim,that
most of the fighting was done by the European troops in this
battle.This statement is totally incorrect. It is necessary to discuss this
battle in some detail,since many myths about European troops
invincibility date originate from this battle as far as British military
historians are concerned. (One British historian Sir Arthur Bryant is
pleased to show only the British regiments on the battle map of
Assaye in his book,while omitting the native regiments!) On face value
it appears that the Europeans did all the fighting since the total
casualties suffered stand out at 644 European and 940 Natives Closer
examination of the casualties reveal that only H.M 74'h Foot suffered
exceptionally heavy casualties i.e. 401 and this happened because
this regiment attacked built up area ,which was difficult to clear. On
the other hand the other British infantry regiment H.M 78'" Foot
suffered only 105 casualties,high casualties but less than four Madras
native infantry battalions which fought the same battle i.e. 14 Madras
Native Infantry which suffered 116 casualties, l/8 Madras Native
Infantry which suffered 170 casualties, l/10 Madras Native Infantry
which suffered 139 casualties and above all 2/12 Madras Native
49
49
Infantry which suffered 222 casualties. Assaye was one of the most
decisive battles of India which destroyed the Maratha confederacy
forces of Sindhia and Bhonsla,and as we can see from the
casualties,the native troops played a very important part in the battle.It
is fair to state that without the natives,the British could not have been
won this battle,on the other hand the battle proved that British
leadership organisation and tactics were the greatest force multipliers.
No other Indian Army of similar size as small as the British Indian
Army at Assaye could have defeated the Marathas at Assaye! It was
the triumph of the European way of warfare using a European led ,and
with a European nucleus,but an essentially predominantly Indian force
to defeat another Indian force which had adopted the European way of
war but was still organisationally and operationally far behind the
superior British Company.
50
50
51
51
What we get from Roy is a much propagated
British version that Assaye was all about a
British regiment HM 74TH Foot .
So with all his flashy endnotes and irrelevant
references all that Kaushik Roy reproduces in
this so called analytical article is Sir Arthur
Bryrant parroted.
Roys analysis is so myopic that he totally
omits the crucial role of Indian Madras
Cavalry in Assaye and while he mentions HM
52
52
19th Light Dragoons parroting British sources
he has nothing to say about 4
th Madras
Cavalry which suffered almost as many
casualties as HM 19th Light Dragoons and two
other Madras cavalry regiments which also
played major role in the battle.
What sort of analysis is Kaushik Roy doing is a
mystery, other than displaying voluminous
endnotes which have nothing to do with
53
53
actual essence of the battles that he white
washes and broad brushes ?
The most shocking failure of Roys analysis in
second anglo Maratha war is his total
elimination of war in the north where Lord
Lake fought the most decisive battles of Delhi
and laswari capturing Delhi and crushing
Maratha power in the north ?
Third Maratha War
54
54
Kaushik Roys claims about forts like as below
are also highly questionable:--
“How can one explain the lightning victories
of the EIC against the Maratha forts between
1818 and 1819? The Marathas neglected to
incor- porate the latest European techniques
regarding fortifications. The forts were
defended by a round stone wall. Neither the
trace italienne configuration nor Vauban’s
star-shaped fortifications for providing
55
55
flanking fire were present. Worse, towards the
end of the eighteenth century the posts”.9
Forts thanks to advances in artillery had
already become obsolete and this fact was
well confirmed in all mysore wars.
Roy fails to note that the Marathas had been
decisively crushed in Second Anglo Maratha
war of the company and the Third Anglo
Maratha was basically a rounding up of
Marathas who were already a defeated entity.
9 Page-675-Ibid
56
56
FIRST SIKH WAR
Roy makes fallacious assertions about Sikhs
and places them as below the Marathas vis a
vis British Companys forces whereas the
Sikhs inflicted highest casualties on the
British company and brought them closest to
defeat as compared to any opponent in India.
This is the most serious failing of Kaushik
Roys analysis.
Kaushik Roy fails to note that in battles like
Moodke the British leadership and tactics
57
57
were so flawed that most of British casualties
occurred because of what we call friendly fire.
The use of horse artillery that Kaushik Roy
worked only at Battle of Moodke as Sikhs had
open flanks and not in any other battle as
Sikhs were very careful about their
flanks.This point our brilliant analyst totally
misses.
The most important point that Kaushik
Roy misses in Sikh warfare is that Sikh
Army was doomed to fail as Sikh chief
58
58
Maharaja Ranjeet Singh never trusted the
Sikhs and instead imported non Sikh
Hindustani Hindus etc as well as non Sikh
Punjabi Hindus who were potential traitors
and totally betrayed the Sikh Army in First
Anglo Sikh War.
Many of Kaushik Roys comparisons are
totally utopian like he compares India with
Russia which was by and large an ethnically
homogenuous state while India was a multi
59
59
multi ethnic religious fragmentation of states
at war with each other.10
SHOCKING TOTALLY AVOIDABLE SIMPLE
FACTUAL MISTAKES WHICH WERE NOT EVEN
NOTED BY THE SUPER BRILLIANT THREE
SOLOMON (ANONYMOUS) REFEREES OF
JMH
10 Page-682-Ibid-Kaushik Roys argument below is totally utopian and
synthetic “Modern military forces require a modern state. Unlike the seventeenth-century Russian kingdom, the Indian powers were not able to
construct a modern bureaucratic state administered by a literate bureaucracy. The British imported elements of Western models of state struc- ture.
This enabled them to construct bureaucratic, revenue-extracting government
machinery, and thus, to maintain a big army permanently. On the other
hand, the Maratha and Sikh jagirdari system of extracting”.
60
60
Roy makes simple mistakes which is
shocking!
Like he gives a new name as well as date of
conquest to eminent British East India
Company General Sir Charles James Napier on
page-683 and calls him :--- William Napier.
11
Kaushik Roy thus writes this as below:--
“On 10 September 1847, Napier’s 9-pounders
opened up and blasted the Beluchi field
fortifications. Under cover of artillery fire, His
11 Page-683-Ibid –Roy changes Sir Charles Napiers name to William Napier and changes year of his operations in
Sindh from 1847 to 1843.
61
61
Majesty’s 17th Regiment followed by the 1st
Sepoy Regiment advanced towards the
Beluchis.
My simple question to Society of Military
History of USA remains as to what are your
referees doing , when they cannot check such
simple mistakes ?
Now this is not just gross lethargy and
criminal intellectual incompetence on part of
62
62
Kaushik Roy and the three Solomon referees
of JMH but more than that :--
• If year was printed 1847 instead of 1843
by typing error how is it that actual date
of battle of Miani here referred to was
changed from 17 February to 10
September ?
• The second shocking part of Kaushik Roys
intellectual rape of history is that he
invents a new unit of Indians fighting at
63
63
Meanee which he calls First Regiment !
What he calls First Regiment was actually
1
st Bombay Grenadiers and not 1st
Regiment.
• But more seriously this regiment
PERFORMED PHENOMENALLY BADLY.Its
commanding officer DISOBEYED Napiers
orders to attack KOTRI and sat doing
nothing suffering only 1 fatal casualty
while two Indian infantry regiments which
ROY TOTALLY OMITS DID ALL THE
64
64
FIGHTING AND SUFFERED HEAVY
CASUALTIES.
• FURTHER AS PUNISHMENT FOR BAD
CONDUCT AND NOT TAKING PART IN THE
BATTLE 1st Bombay Grenadiers was NOT
GRANTED THE BATTLE HONOUR CALLED
MIANI 1843.But Kaushik Roy has nothing
to say about this.MOST THIRD RATE
SYNTHESIS OF BRITISH INDIAN MILITARY
HISTORY.
65
65
• Whereas in reality there was only 12th
Regiment of Bombay Infantry at Meanee
as CLEALY AND SPECIFICALLY LISTED IN
British East India Companys records freely
available in all public libraries in India
Pakistan and worldwide.
• How such simple facts can escape
referees of Society of Military History is
shocking.
66
66
67
67
How Kaushik Roy could be so disastorous
with his facts and how the know all
anonymous Solomon referees of JMH could
be so incompetent is mind boggling !
Cover of the chapter of step 4 - Overview yourself, an introspection into yourself, your strong & week points, your opportunities & challenges that you face.
Engravings of apparatus for various laboratory chemical analyses.
Chemical Analysis by G.Newth 1914.
Quantitative and Qualitative analysis for Secondary and University students.
Published by Longmans Green & Co, London. Green boards 476 pages 13cm x 19cm.
This is me at work at SWCA, examining an extremely large bone (identified as a humerus) for cut marks that would indicate butchering. I'm using a giant magnifying glass that has 3x and 6x magnification. By the way, I didn't find any cut marks on this particular bone. Photo taken by Tina Nielsen
Research technician James Wainaina at the mycotoxin diagnostics and nutritional analysis platform, BecA-ILRI Hub, Nairobi (photo credit: BecA-ILRI Hub/Tim Hall)
Konark Sun Temple ([koɳarəkə]; also Konârak) is a 13th-century Sun Temple at Konark in Odisha, India. It is believed that the temple was built by king Narasimhadeva I of Eastern Ganga Dynasty around 1250 CE. The temple is in the shape of a gigantic chariot elaborately carved stone wheels, pillars and walls. A major part of the structure is now in ruins. The temple is a UNESCO World Heritage Site and has also featured on various list of Seven Wonders of India.
ETYMOLOGY
The name Konark derives from the combination of the Sanskrit words, Kona (corner) and Arka (sun), in reference to the temple which was dedicated to the Sun god Surya.
The monument was also called the Black Pagoda by European sailors. In contrast, the Jagannath Temple in Puri was called the White Pagoda. Both temples served as important landmarks for the sailors.
ARCHITECTURE
The temple was originally built at the mouth of the river Chandrabhaga, but the waterline has receded since then. The temple has been built in the form of a giant ornamented chariot of the Sun god, Surya. It has twelve pairs of elaborately carved stone wheels which are 3 meters wide and is pulled by a set of seven horses (4 on the right and 3 on the left). The temple follows the traditional style of Kalinga architecture. It is carefully oriented towards the east so that the first rays of sunrise strikes the principal entrance. The temple is built from Khondalite rocks.
The original temple had a main sanctum sanctorum (vimana), which was supposedly 70 m tall. Due to the weight of the super structure and weak soil of the area the main vimana fell in 1837. The audience hall (Jagamohana), which is about 30 m tall, still stands and is the principal structure in the surviving ruins. Among the structures, which have survived to the current day, are the dance hall (Nata mandira) and dining hall (Bhoga mandapa).
The Konark temple is also known for its erotic sculptures of maithunas.
Two smaller ruined temples have been discovered nearby. One of them is called the Mayadevi Temple and is located southwest from the entrance of the main temple. It is presumed to have been dedicated to Mayadevi, one of the Sun god's wives. It has been dated to the late 11th century, earlier than the main temple. The other one belongs to some unknown Vaishnava deity. Sculptures of Balarama, Varaha and Trivikrama have been found at the site, indicating it to be a Vaishnavite temple. Both temples have their primary idols missing.
A collection of fallen sculptures can be viewed at the Konark Archaeological Museum which is maintained by the Archaeological Survey of India.
HISTORY
ANCIENT TEXTS
According to Bhavishya Purana and Samba Purana, there may have been a sun temple in the region earlier than current one, dating to the 9th century or earlier. The books mention three sun temples at Mundira (possibly Konark), Kalapriya (Mathura), and Multan.
According to the scriptures, Samba, the son of Krishna, was cursed with leprosy. He was advised by the sage, Kataka, to worship the sun god to cure his aliment. Samba underwent penance for 12 years in Mitravana near the shores of Chandrabhaga. Both the original Konark temple and the Multan temple have been attributed to Samba.
The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (1st Century CE) mentions a port called Kainapara, which has been identified as current day Konark.
SUN DIAL AND TIME
The wheels of the temple are sundials which can be used to calculate time accurately to a minute including day and night.
SECOND TEMPLE
According to the Madala Panji, there was another temple in the region. It was built by one Pundara Kesari. He may have been Puranjaya, the 7th century ruler, of the Somavasmi Dynasty.
NARASIMHADEVA I
The current temple is attributed to Narasimhadeva I of the Eastern Ganga Dynasty. His reign spanned from 1238 to 1264 CE. The temple may have been a monument to his victory against Tughral Tughan Khan.
DHARMAPADA´S TALE
According to local folklore, Narasimhadeva I had hired a chief architect called Bisu Maharana to build the temple. After a period of twelve years, a workforce of twelve thousand almost finished the construction. But, they failed to mount the crown stone. The impatient king ordered the temple to be finished in three days or the artisans be put to death. At the time, Bisu Maharana's twelve-year-old son, Dharmapada arrived at the site. Bisu Maharana had never seen his son, as he had left his village when his wife was still pregnant. Dharmapada successfully proposed a solution to mount the crown stone. But, the artisans were still apprehensive that the king will be displeased to learn that a boy succeeded where his best artisans failed. Dharmapada climbed onto the temple and leapt into the water to save his father and his co-workers.
COLLAPSE
There have been several proposed theories for the collapse of the main sanctum. The date of the collapse is also not certain.
The Kenduli copper plates of Narasimha IV (Saka 1305 or 1384 CE) states the temple to be in a perfect state.
In the 16th century Ain-i-Akbari, Abul Fazl also mentions Konark being in a proper state. The account also mentions the cost of construction being 12 years of revenue.
The cause of collapse is also placed on Kalapahad who invaded Odisha in 1568.
In 1627, the then Raja of Khurda had removed the sun idol from Konark and moved it to the Jagannath temple in Puri.
James Fergusson (1808–1886) had the opinion that marshy foundation had caused the collapse. But, the structure has shown no sign of sinking into its foundation. Fergusson, who visited the temple in 1837, recorded a corner of the main sanctum still standing. It also fell down in 1848 due to a strong gale.
According to Percy Brown (1872–1955), the temple was not properly completed and so it collapsed. This contradicts earlier recorded accounts of the temple being in a proper state.
In 1929, an analysis of a moss covered rock estimated the date of abandonment at around 1573.
Other proposed causes include lightning and earthquake.
ARUNA STAMBHA
In the last quarter of the 18th century, when worship had ceased in the temple, the Aruna stambha (Aruna pillar) was removed from the entrance of Konark temple and placed at the Singha-dwara (Lion's Gate) of the Jagannath temple in Puri by a Maratha Brahmachari called Goswain (or Goswami). The pillar is made of monolithic chlorite and is 10.26 m tall . It is dedicated to Aruna, the charioteer of the Sun god.
PRESERVATION EFFORTS
In 1803, requests were made for conservations by the East India Marine Board, but only removal of stones from the site was prohibited by the Governor General. As a result, a part of the main tower, which was still standing, collapsed in 1848.
The then Raja of Khurda removed some stones and sculptures to use in a temple he was building in Puri. A few gateways and some sculptures were destroyed in the process. In 1838, after the depredation of the Raja of Khurda, Asiatic Society of Bengal requested conservation, but the requests were denied and only preventative of human-caused damages were guaranteed. The Raja was forbidden to remove any more stones.
In 1859, Asiatic Society of Bengal proposed moving an architrave depicting the navagraha to the Indian Museum in Calcutta. The first attempt in 1867 was abandoned as the funds ran out.
In 1894, thirteen sculptures were moved to the Indian Museum.
In 1903 when a major excavation was attempted nearby, the then Lieutenant governor of Bengal, J. A. Baurdilon, ordered the temple to be sealed and filled with sand to prevent the collapse of the Jagamohana.
In 1906, casuarina and punnang trees were planted facing the sea to buffer the site against sand-laden winds.
In 1909, the Mayadevi temple was discovered while removing sand and debris.
The temple was granted World Heritage Site status by the UNESCO in 1984.
WIKIPEDIA
A page out of English class, when I was 16 or 17. This is particularly interesting because you were supposed to contrast Singlish with the Queen's English. My handwriting still looks a lot like this, but not quite.
In spite of its sinister name, the Bucket of Blood Saloon gives off the charm of the old time hey-days with its many hanging lamps and mirrors. Memories of a time long ago await the visitor wandering in to the bar for a cold drink in this cool oasis. This structure constructed in 1876 after the great fire of 1875 which took up to a thousand structures of the town. Most of the towns core buildings were lost or sustained damage, unfortunately the first structure that previously occupied this location, like a lot of the other towns buildings of that time was completely destroyed. Though the building you are currently viewing has gone through several renovations, iterations and operations since 1876, it like many of the other Historical buildings throughout Virginia City survive as living history. The masonry walls of the 'Old Bucket' predate the great fire of 1875. Shadows of doorways recall a time when enclosed stairs led down to the Boston Saloon.
The Bucket of Blood has long served as a local landmark in the center of Virginia City. Until recently no one realized that the Boston Saloon lay under an asphalt cap to the rear of the building. The discovery of the Boston Saloon location in 1997, together with a subsequent test excavation, demonstrates that the site is rich with artifacts and has national importance. This business stayed at a single location through most of its existence, making it an anomaly at the outset.
Defying the odds, remnants of the saloon survive in the archaeological record, escaping 125 years of development and bottle collecting. An asphalt parking lot currently caps the property, which the Comstock Archaeology Center excavated in September 2000. The Center is still completing analysis and cataloguing over the years. Pending funding, one or more exhibits will open at various locations in the future.
This is how it looks like when I park it. Paint job is worse than I thought. Will need repainting. Wheels are ok. All hub caps are on the trunk, in pretty good shape.
For his Branding 2 project, Scott Strathern chose to brand the identity of a waterfront boutique hotel on the shores of False Creek in Vancouver. The result is a refreshing take on a modern hotel that meets the needs of his audience — smart, design savvy, cool, and hip people in the know. The brand package consists of competitive analysis, moodboard, environment design, logo design and miscellaneous branded applications.
Learn more about VFS's one-year Digital Design program at www.vfs.com/digitaldesign.
Konark Sun Temple ([koɳarəkə]; also Konârak) is a 13th-century Sun Temple at Konark in Odisha, India. It is believed that the temple was built by king Narasimhadeva I of Eastern Ganga Dynasty around 1250 CE. The temple is in the shape of a gigantic chariot elaborately carved stone wheels, pillars and walls. A major part of the structure is now in ruins. The temple is a UNESCO World Heritage Site and has also featured on various list of Seven Wonders of India.
ETYMOLOGY
The name Konark derives from the combination of the Sanskrit words, Kona (corner) and Arka (sun), in reference to the temple which was dedicated to the Sun god Surya.
The monument was also called the Black Pagoda by European sailors. In contrast, the Jagannath Temple in Puri was called the White Pagoda. Both temples served as important landmarks for the sailors.
ARCHITECTURE
The temple was originally built at the mouth of the river Chandrabhaga, but the waterline has receded since then. The temple has been built in the form of a giant ornamented chariot of the Sun god, Surya. It has twelve pairs of elaborately carved stone wheels which are 3 meters wide and is pulled by a set of seven horses (4 on the right and 3 on the left). The temple follows the traditional style of Kalinga architecture. It is carefully oriented towards the east so that the first rays of sunrise strikes the principal entrance. The temple is built from Khondalite rocks.
The original temple had a main sanctum sanctorum (vimana), which was supposedly 70 m tall. Due to the weight of the super structure and weak soil of the area the main vimana fell in 1837. The audience hall (Jagamohana), which is about 30 m tall, still stands and is the principal structure in the surviving ruins. Among the structures, which have survived to the current day, are the dance hall (Nata mandira) and dining hall (Bhoga mandapa).
The Konark temple is also known for its erotic sculptures of maithunas.
Two smaller ruined temples have been discovered nearby. One of them is called the Mayadevi Temple and is located southwest from the entrance of the main temple. It is presumed to have been dedicated to Mayadevi, one of the Sun god's wives. It has been dated to the late 11th century, earlier than the main temple. The other one belongs to some unknown Vaishnava deity. Sculptures of Balarama, Varaha and Trivikrama have been found at the site, indicating it to be a Vaishnavite temple. Both temples have their primary idols missing.
A collection of fallen sculptures can be viewed at the Konark Archaeological Museum which is maintained by the Archaeological Survey of India.
HISTORY
ANCIENT TEXTS
According to Bhavishya Purana and Samba Purana, there may have been a sun temple in the region earlier than current one, dating to the 9th century or earlier. The books mention three sun temples at Mundira (possibly Konark), Kalapriya (Mathura), and Multan.
According to the scriptures, Samba, the son of Krishna, was cursed with leprosy. He was advised by the sage, Kataka, to worship the sun god to cure his aliment. Samba underwent penance for 12 years in Mitravana near the shores of Chandrabhaga. Both the original Konark temple and the Multan temple have been attributed to Samba.
The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea (1st Century CE) mentions a port called Kainapara, which has been identified as current day Konark.
SUN DIAL AND TIME
The wheels of the temple are sundials which can be used to calculate time accurately to a minute including day and night.
SECOND TEMPLE
According to the Madala Panji, there was another temple in the region. It was built by one Pundara Kesari. He may have been Puranjaya, the 7th century ruler, of the Somavasmi Dynasty.
NARASIMHADEVA I
The current temple is attributed to Narasimhadeva I of the Eastern Ganga Dynasty. His reign spanned from 1238 to 1264 CE. The temple may have been a monument to his victory against Tughral Tughan Khan.
DHARMAPADA´S TALE
According to local folklore, Narasimhadeva I had hired a chief architect called Bisu Maharana to build the temple. After a period of twelve years, a workforce of twelve thousand almost finished the construction. But, they failed to mount the crown stone. The impatient king ordered the temple to be finished in three days or the artisans be put to death. At the time, Bisu Maharana's twelve-year-old son, Dharmapada arrived at the site. Bisu Maharana had never seen his son, as he had left his village when his wife was still pregnant. Dharmapada successfully proposed a solution to mount the crown stone. But, the artisans were still apprehensive that the king will be displeased to learn that a boy succeeded where his best artisans failed. Dharmapada climbed onto the temple and leapt into the water to save his father and his co-workers.
COLLAPSE
There have been several proposed theories for the collapse of the main sanctum. The date of the collapse is also not certain.
The Kenduli copper plates of Narasimha IV (Saka 1305 or 1384 CE) states the temple to be in a perfect state.
In the 16th century Ain-i-Akbari, Abul Fazl also mentions Konark being in a proper state. The account also mentions the cost of construction being 12 years of revenue.
The cause of collapse is also placed on Kalapahad who invaded Odisha in 1568.
In 1627, the then Raja of Khurda had removed the sun idol from Konark and moved it to the Jagannath temple in Puri.
James Fergusson (1808–1886) had the opinion that marshy foundation had caused the collapse. But, the structure has shown no sign of sinking into its foundation. Fergusson, who visited the temple in 1837, recorded a corner of the main sanctum still standing. It also fell down in 1848 due to a strong gale.
According to Percy Brown (1872–1955), the temple was not properly completed and so it collapsed. This contradicts earlier recorded accounts of the temple being in a proper state.
In 1929, an analysis of a moss covered rock estimated the date of abandonment at around 1573.
Other proposed causes include lightning and earthquake.
ARUNA STAMBHA
In the last quarter of the 18th century, when worship had ceased in the temple, the Aruna stambha (Aruna pillar) was removed from the entrance of Konark temple and placed at the Singha-dwara (Lion's Gate) of the Jagannath temple in Puri by a Maratha Brahmachari called Goswain (or Goswami). The pillar is made of monolithic chlorite and is 10.26 m tall . It is dedicated to Aruna, the charioteer of the Sun god.
PRESERVATION EFFORTS
In 1803, requests were made for conservations by the East India Marine Board, but only removal of stones from the site was prohibited by the Governor General. As a result, a part of the main tower, which was still standing, collapsed in 1848.
The then Raja of Khurda removed some stones and sculptures to use in a temple he was building in Puri. A few gateways and some sculptures were destroyed in the process. In 1838, after the depredation of the Raja of Khurda, Asiatic Society of Bengal requested conservation, but the requests were denied and only preventative of human-caused damages were guaranteed. The Raja was forbidden to remove any more stones.
In 1859, Asiatic Society of Bengal proposed moving an architrave depicting the navagraha to the Indian Museum in Calcutta. The first attempt in 1867 was abandoned as the funds ran out.
In 1894, thirteen sculptures were moved to the Indian Museum.
In 1903 when a major excavation was attempted nearby, the then Lieutenant governor of Bengal, J. A. Baurdilon, ordered the temple to be sealed and filled with sand to prevent the collapse of the Jagamohana.
In 1906, casuarina and punnang trees were planted facing the sea to buffer the site against sand-laden winds.
In 1909, the Mayadevi temple was discovered while removing sand and debris.
The temple was granted World Heritage Site status by the UNESCO in 1984.
WIKIPEDIA
Side markers are not good. There are some details on the body that need work, such as fiber patches. Head light's rims are from a Volkswagen, need to be replaced.
Options trading for beginners might be the aspect that many novice investors and traders overlook. They all love to learn advanced techniques. Yet, how can you have flying leaps without a stepping stone? Building a solid foundation of basic options trading knowledge is the top priority for beginners. Scroll down this article to unfold effective strategies for entry-level options traders.
What is the Basic Options Trading for Beginners?
Effective Strategies for Options Trading
There are two main types of contracts in options, including call and put. Investors and traders are likely to use the results of technical analysis and fundamental analysis to draw insights into market trends. Then, they decide to buy or sell their call or put options. This section deep dives into some basic options trading strategies for beginners.
Buying Calls (Long Calls)
Buying a call option is a recommended action to the expectation that the price of an asset will rise. In case the market moves in the opposite direction, you only have the limited loss of the premium for the options.
For example:
If you want to buy $165-priced Apple shares with an investment of $5,000. It means you can buy around 30 shares. A scenario is that the stock price can increase by 10%, around $181, over the next month. Not to mention any brokerage commission or transaction fees, your portfolio will be around $5,445 – a net dollar return of $495, equivalent to 10% of the investment.
Such huge potential profits can come along with great potential losses, can’t they?
The good news is that if things go awry, you only have to suffer from the loss – the paid premium. It is a real bargain when you gain unlimited profits with limited losses.
Buying Puts (Long Puts)
A put option allows the holder the right to sell the underlying asset at the strike price by the expiration date. Those who are cautious of a specific stock, ETF, index, etc., or want to earn profits through the falling price actions.
For example:
When expecting the price of a security to decrease from $60 to $50, you can sell the stock short. Yet, it can be risky as your forecast can be wrong. So, the recommendation is to buy the $50 put option with a premium of $2. As a result, you will only lose $2 if the price does not drop as expected. Yet, you can make around $3 if the price of the stock declines to $45.
So, what is the point?
Same with the call options, a put option can leverage the trader’s return to maximum levels while the risks are limited.
Covered Calls
A covered call , as the name suggests, has an existing long position overlaid in the underlying asset. The model works like an upside call to cover the existing position size with the same amount. The writers of covered calls will gain income through the option premium, yet have limited potential for profitability.
For example:
Assuming that a trader buys 1,000 shares at $44 per share and writes 10 call options per which has 100 shares at the strike price of $46. These options will expire in one month. The total cost for 10 contracts is $250.
What is the risk/reward in this case?
If the share price is higher than the strike price by the expiration date, the short call option can make a trader suffer from bigger losses. They have to deliver the shares at the strike price when it can be lower than the market price. Yet, a covered call can help them with limited risk in the form of premium when selling the call!
Protective Puts
A protective put relates to buying a downside put to overlay an existing in the underlying security. The purpose of this strategy is to set the limit of your losses.
The option premium is a must, yet a protective put is a real shield for those who expect downside protection for their assets. It shares some common characteristics with a long put. Yet, it can help you gain profits from a downside move instead of an upside move.
For example:
When buying 1,000 shares of Coca-Cola at $44, you can protect the investment from adverse price actions in the next two months through three options as below.
Options
Premium
$44 put
$1.23
$42 put
$0.47
$40 put
$0.2
If you want to hedge against the risk of a price drop, you can purchase 10 at-the-money put options at $44. Or you can switch to a less costly out-of-the-money (OTM) option to lower the cost to under $200.
Long Straddles
A straddle enables you to capitalize on the future volatility without taking a bet on the real market moves. It means you can gain profits whether it moves up or down. A trader will buy both a call and a put option sharing the same strike price and expiry date on the same stock. So, it can be more expensive than other options trading strategies as it refers to the purchase of two at-the-money options.
Example:
The case is where a trader forecast large price fluctuations after an earnings announcement. The current price is $100. So, they create a straddle by purchasing both a $5 put option and a $5 call option at the strike price of $100.
What Are the Levels of Options Trading?
Options Trading Levels
There are two factors in determining the levels of options trading , including the riskiness and complexity. The strategies that we share above are mostly in the basic learning options trading for beginners. So, they are mostly in level 1 and level 2. Another requirement is to maintain a margin account to gain the approval of the brokerages.
Level 1 includes covered calls and protective puts. It happens when an investor is the owner of the underlying asset.
Level 2 refers to long calls, puts, straddles and strangles.
Level 3 comprises options spreads. It involves the purchase of one or more options while selling one or more different options of the same securities.
Level 4 relates to the writing of naked options.
What is The Best Way to Learn Options Trading?
There are many ways to kick off your options trading. Yet it can be an odd lack if not mentioned online education. Many successful traders now share that they collect useful knowledge and tools through online classes.
FAQs
Can a Beginner Trade in Options?
Yes, they can as long as they master the crucial basics. Getting themselves familiar with common terms and entry-level options trading strategies is the least they should do before trading options.
How Can I Start Trading Options?
You can start your options trading through simple applications to online brokerage. Another requirement is to have a margin account. After getting the approval, you can enter orders to trade options in the same way you trade stocks. An option chain is to determine which underlying, expiry date, strike price, etc.
How Much Can a Beginner Make Trading Options?
The rate ranges from 10% to 50% per trade. For example, if you start with $10,000 in an options contract, you can earn from $250 to $1,000. Yet, realistic trading involves risks so it is crucial to stay focused on the enhancement of trading knowledge and risk management.
When Do Options Trade During the Day?
You can trade options during normal stock market hours, from 9:00 AM to 04:00 PM EST.
Before You Go
Our guide on options trading for beginners shares basic strategies to help novice traders maintain their profitability amidst the volatility. Besides, you can find answers to relevant aspects, such as expected income from options trading, popular platforms, etc.
Hopefully, this blog can help you gain more confidence to start your options trading career. Stay tuned for our next articles with deep dives into not only options trading but also other instruments!
Article Source: https://libraryoftrader.net/options-trading-for-beginners
Researchers Phil Sharer (front) and Aymeric Rousseau work on AUTONOMIE, Argonne's next-generation plug-and-play software architecture for evaluating the fuel consumption benefits of both components and powertrain throughout the different phases of model-based design, from modeling to hardware implementation.
Photo by Wes Agresta / Courtesy Argonne National Laboratory.