Auto news on Youtube Jan 8 2019

Hi curious and curious, I'm JJ Priego, welcome to Science Science, that little place,

where we see that the known finite and infinite is unknown.

Today take a new video, beside our friend Alex Riveiro.

As you know, also you have a YouTube channel, highly recommended, I encourage

to subscribe.

Well, today continued with its yarns Twitter.

And today, let's talk about the famous "Higgs Boson"

Well, you ⨀queréis know more ...

Well, let's look around.

[MUSIC]

You may know that the Higgs boson was discovered in 2013, but its function may you

Mandarin Chinese may sound right?

By the way, this is just a cool image, which we found by searching for "boson

de higgs".

But obviously it is not their representation.

To speak, the Higgs boson, we need to talk a bit, particle physics,

to understand where all the pieces fit.

There is something that physicists use, we call the Standard Model, which is simply

the laws of particle physics.

These are very modest, because "only" explain all matter and forces, we see

around us.

Come on, little.

And of course, that sounds perhaps even more intimidating ...

The important thing is to keep a fairly simple idea.

There are two main categories.

Fermions and bosons's.

Fermions are the subject.

We protons and neutrons, which are composed of quarks and leptons,

which they are indivisible and are things like electrons and neutrinos.

In short.

All you can touch, like this shirt, is composed of fermions.

So far, it sounds simple, right?

Well, let's try, so be it throughout the video ... let's see ...

Now we are bosons, which are particles that communicate forces

universe.

And I said so, may sound like Chinese, but you know bosons ...

For example, the photon, is the boson that connects the electromagnetic force.

And we also have the gluon, which communicates the strong nuclear force and the bosons

W and Z communicating the weak nuclear.

But the standard model, poses a couple of mysteries.

For example.

There are four fundamental forces in the universe.

Electromagnetic (whose boson photon).

The strong interaction (having at gluón) and weak (having a W and Z).

You may ask ... And gravity, which has ...?

Because you do not have boson!

Or rather.

We do not know if you have it.

But surely, you've heard his name: the graviton

In fact, if you want to get a Nobel Prize, you can try to prove the existence

graviton, or nonexistence, of course ...

At another point, we will tell precisely that the graviton, is one of the pitfalls for

have a theory of everything.

By the way, here I have a playlist, where I talk about the Theory of Everything ...

And there is another mystery, but ... to talk about it, I have to introduce you to this gentleman:

Peter Higgs.

Peter Higgs, a British physicist who, one day back in the 60s, it became

one of those inevitable questions ...

So curious, imagine the good man, sitting in his chair, there, in the countryside

English, watching the cows graze and wondered "Why do things have mass?

Why is the amount of mass of an object determines the difficulty to move it or stop it? "

Come on, the typical question that happens to one's head in a moment of reflection ...

But ... bosons, perhaps you have read (or heard) that are "excitations" of

their respective fields.

That is, if you excite an electromagnetic field a photon occurs.

If you excite a field of strong nuclear interaction, a gluon .. etc, etc, etc.

Well, those fields are three-dimensional and they are tooooooooooodo the universe.

So, Peter Higgs suggested that perhaps had a similar mass to the field.

Something we call the Higgs field.

In this video from here, I will also spoke, the Higgs field, in a curious way.

Well, as I said, Higgs suggested that perhaps there was a similar field for

dough.

That, like those other fields, would be everywhere in the universe.

And its corresponding boson would be the Higgs boson.

A particle literally be responsible for assigning mass to everything else.

Issue?

For a boson, it is necessary to excite, as I said, the field of turn.

And that is achieved with energy.

So, we had to wait (even though the scientific community and sensed that the

Higgs had to exist) until recent times

This one here, is one of the tunnels of the LHC, the Large Hadron Collider.

A particle accelerator.

Inside the physical launch, two proton beams in opposite directions, a

very close to the speed of light.

Today, I do not know what the exact speed, but in 2013 moved to 0.999999991c protons.

Or what is the same, only 10km / h slower than the speed of light.

Brutal ¿no?

And as you may know, the nice thing about Einstein told us what that E = mc2.

Energy equals mass times velocity of light squared.

So if you do collide, two beams of light with high energy, what occurs?

For mass.

Particles, very massive lasting a very short time

The average life of a Higgs boson is this 1.56 x 10 (-22) s.

That is, 0.0000000000000000000156 seconds.

So we had to wait, the Large Hadron Collider, to see that, indeed,

Peter Higgs was right.

There is a particle, which only manifests itself in very energetic collisions, giving you

mass everything else.

The finding also earned him a Nobel Prize he received in 2013 and shared

François Englert.

As you may know, the Higgs boson, also often been called the "particle

of God".

But the truth is that it has little divine.

Actually, the name was a joke of a physicist, who was just trying to capture that

it is a particle, very important and very elusive.

But the name seeped into the media ... (I guess it's easier to remember ... and salseo ...

You know...).

Evil we know that there is a Higgs boson is posed, a small

dilemma about the universe.

And, their status, could determine the fate of the universe.

In this video I talked about it here ...

Besides ... There is a hypothesis called "false vacuum," which is to ask if the

Higgs field, is at its lowest possible energy ..

Although it is not exactly an energy level, but I think it is easier for us

We understand if we indicated so ...

The question is this.

If it is at its lowest level, we live in a stable universe.

There is nothing to worry about.

But if there is a lower power level, the Higgs boson could fall,

and cause sudden and sudden changes in the universe

If the lowest level exists, the Higgs boson is not in it, we say that we live

in a "metastable" universe

And in recent times, some studies have attempted to determine whether we live in a universe

stable or metastable.

The conclusion seems to be that the universe could be metastable, but there is a mystery.

It all depends on that, those energies so high, which I have told you, you have to

to collide two beams of light to observe things like the Higgs boson, standard model

is equal and the truth is we do not know if so.

We do not know if the model is consistent (and indeed seems not), so the universe,

It could be perfectly stable, but we will not be able to prove it.

The good news is that, even if metastable, the universe takes 13,800 million

years here.

And some have calculated that, if any, that final, it would be trillions of years.

How you have fallen curious and inquisitive?

Good video here today. (1 meu Darrere) I hope you enjoyed the collaboration

Alex Riveiro.

And you already know, to follow quickly on Twitter and YouTube.

Is a crack. (Fins here) For my part I would've been great and if you like you.

We will continue with the collaboration.

Ponédmelo in the comments.

And you know, if you liked this video I give the like.

And if it's your first time in Science of Science give to this button and subscribe to the channel,

also the bell to keep abreast of developments.

Finally I recommend you follow my other 2 channels, Stories of History and Easypromos

TV.

You will like them.

And remember, knowledge is an essential requirement for survival.

Many thanks.

For more infomation >> 💥 ¿Qué es el BOSÓN DE HIGGS? - Duration: 9:47.

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

What If The Moon Landing Was Faked? - Duration: 3:41.

For more infomation >> What If The Moon Landing Was Faked? - Duration: 3:41.

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

Modern vs contemporary interior design: What to know for your next home - Duration: 6:22.

In this video, we talk about modern versus contemporary design styles.

We also talked about transitional versus traditional. That's starting right now.

Welcome to Homebuyer's School,

brought to you by Brookfield Residential.

Hi everyone I'm Karl Yeh, and welcome to another Homebuyer's School video,

a channel where you get the latest strategies, tactics, and tips from home

buying experts and remember, if this is your first time on this channel and you

want to get the latest strategies from the experts, hit the subscription button

below, hit the little notification about so you don't miss anything.

So today I'm joined by Deborah Armstrong,

Senior Interior Designer with Brookfield

Residential and today we're gonna do a little bit of - I guess, classroom activity,

not that this is Homebuyer's School but - but the question I wanna answer is:

What is the difference between modern

versus contemporary interior design?

So modern is a time period,

typically known as mid-century modern.

It's any design that's - you know, you

could see in the 50s and the 60s. Okay.

A contemporary is ever-changing,

whereas modern you can't change it,

it's always - you know, the 50s and 60s you know.

So what does the - what does that mean?

Like 50s and 60s design, can you give a couple examples?

yeah in the 50s and 60s if you look back, I mean, I can remember those days,

but they're - you know, very clean lines. Everything's very, very clean.

The furniture was raised - you know, off the floor, no skirts on sofas, a lot of wood, teak.

Would hardwood floors be an example?

Absolutely yeah, they were the narrower boards,

they were site finished, but yes, definitely hardwood floors, area carpets.

And then the type of furniture,

what kind of - how would you define modern type of furniture?

Again very, very straight clean lines.

There was a molded furniture whether it

be wood or plastic that we saw back in

those days. Accessories were very clean lined as well, not fussy at all.

Okay and would - and what is the difference between that and

contemporary interior design?

So contemporary is ever-changing.

It is what is current today. So five years

ago, what was contemporary then is not

contemporary today.

so I - so like you said it was ever changing, so let's go back to modern. So what -

what is in a modern home and I think you

talked about that but like - what type of

materials did they use?

A lot of wood, metals, a lot of chrome,

glass, leather, leather yeah.

Leather was very, very popular back - back then too and and even plastic - like to look like leather.

And so there's another thing that I want to talk about too is

in traditional versus transitional, so

how does traditional and transitional go

together with contemporary versus modern?

well they don't really, again because

modern is a time period set on its own in the fifties and sixties,

contemporary is what is current now.

Maybe what transitional you could mix what is

current now with very traditional furniture

so you get a blend of

contemporary and traditional and that's called transitional.

So let's talk about traditional: what is -

first of all what is traditional?

Traditional is usually based on the airs between in the 18th century and the 19th century.

It's quite fuzzy furniture, elegant, heavy draperies, beautiful fabrics. Woodwork was

very ornate - you know, heavy crown mouldings. The furniture itself too - it was

very heavy and ornate. You had certain areas, particularly the Chippendale, the

Sheridan, the Queen Anne furniture. Very common during that

transitional time - traditional period.

So when you say traditional, what in my

mind that brings about like royalty

would that be correct?

It has a - yeah, you could say that, very fussy, very elegant

So like something you probably see in Buckingham Palace?

Yes, yes. Okay.

And today, so what - I guess - in today's

interior design world what is, I guess popular?

Right now we're seeing a lot of

come back with the modern furniture known as mid-century or some people

refer to retro. So again, we're starting to see those really clean lines again,

minimalistic looks.

So I guess you could say that

modern has become contemporary?

Yes you could. And most, I guess most - do most home builders now

appeal to that like contemporary

designer or are there like - not that we want to

name any of them, but like are there any ones - any that are very specific to a

traditional look or transitional look or or is it mostly all contemporary nowadays?

I think most of it's contemporary

nowadays and - and how people are changing the look of their

home is how they decorate it. They're putting their stamp on it

through - through their decorations and maybe some of their interior selections

whether it be carpet or tile, to work around those and in design aspects.

And does this design actually impact how

the house is actually built or no?

No not at all. If you're looking for a modern home exact, it will. Yes, you will build

a home that has the look - much more clean lines yes you know for that modern

feel. Clean, very straight clean lines on the outside. And we are seeing that, we

are seeing some builders, not specifically - I mean it's the home owner's

you know, custom design that's dictating that. Okay perfect, anything else to add in

terms of modern contemporary interior design? No, just have fun with it all

they're all great, you know - and everybody likes a little something different so

anything goes nowadays.

Thank you very much for joining us and we'll catch you next time.

That's another edition of Homebuyer's School.

Tune in next time for more expert tips and tricks

and visit www,homebuyersschool.ca to bring

you one step closer to finding your dream home.

As with everything it would be great if you like

and share our videos.

Also, please let us know if you have any

home buying questions you want us to answer.

For more infomation >> Modern vs contemporary interior design: What to know for your next home - Duration: 6:22.

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

This Is What Fortnite Was Like With NO Bloom... (Footage From Shooting Test #2) - Duration: 10:07.

Hey what is going on guys, in this video today we're going to be talking about bloom and

the general shooting/aiming mechanics of Fortnite. So it's a known fact that most weapons in

Fortnite use a bloom-based shooting system. And as I've explained before, bloom is basically

the increasing size of your cross-hair after firing multiple shots, where there�s a random

chance for the bullets you shoot to go off in slightly different directions even if you

haven�t changed your aim. It's a mechanic that the majority of Fortnite players dislike,

because it adds an element of RNG to pretty much every non-close range fight in the game.

And I'm sure that about 99% of you guys watching this video already knew that. But, how many

of you were aware of the fact that Epic Games actually temporarily experimented. with a

version of Fortnite that had absolutely 0 bloom. That's right, this actually did happen,

and in this video I'll be showing you guys footage of Fortnite without bloom, as well

as discussing the impact that bloom vs. no-bloom and other general shooting mechanics would

have on the game. So, without further ado, let's get right into it.

Ok guys, so over a year ago in December of 2017, Fortnite was attempting to make some

pretty drastic changes to the way gunfights worked in their game. This came in the form

of, what was basically an LTM, known as "Shooting Test". This was a public mode that pretty

much anybody could play, and it was a way for Epic to kinda track statistics and gather

feedback from players, about the shooting changes they temporarily were testing in the

mode. A decent amount of people know about shooting test #1, which most notably led to

the inclusion of first shot accuracy into regular Fortnite Battle Royale. But, a lot

less people know about shooting test #2 and, there's a pretty good reason why that is.

Because shooting test #2 was never even supposed to be seen by the public. It was accidentally

released into the game during some random short time period, and other than that accidental

release, was never seen again. That's really interesting because shooting test #2 was designed

to test the impact of what Epic called "perfect accuracy" and "recoil". Perfect accuracy basically

just meant no bloom, and I'm sure all of you guys know what recoil is. Since it was released

at a totally random time, with absolutely no announcement, and this was when Fortnite

was no where near as popular as it is now. There really isn't a lot footage of this shooting

test available online, there's a lot of test #1 but, not much at all of test #2. Luckily,

I was given permission by a youtuber named "Silx", to show you guys about 45-60 second

of clips from shooting test #2, pretty much showcasing what Fortnite looks like without

bloom. It's really crazy to see, and he does an awesome job of showing it, because he's

actually a really good player. So I'll have his youtube link on the screen and you guys

are definitely gonna wanna pay attention to this clip, because it's something that not

many people have ever seen.

Alright guys, so what you just witnessed was basically what Fortnite would be like if bloom

was simply not a part of the game. Hopefully you guys realized that because this shooting

test took place all the way back during season 2 of Fortnite, the game was played very differently

than the way its played today. Also, keep in mind that recoil was also present in this

clip. I think it was a bit hard to tell simply because Silx was so good at controlling it,

but, trust me, it was there. And even though I never played it myself, apparently recoil

was actually fairly difficult to control on controller. So, I know what the majority of

you guys are likely thinking right now. Probably something along the lines of "Oh my gosh,

that looks so awesome, it would make Fortnite so much more skill-based and rewarding towards

players who have good aim, why didn't they make that change permanent?" And, I'll be

honest, when I first saw this, that was pretty much my reaction as well. But, as I began

to read more about it, and started hearing some opinions from players who actually played

the shooting test, I kinda started to change my mind. And I'm definitely not saying that

bloom is good or anything. But, even though we can all acknowledge that the bloom-based

shooting system of Fortnite is flawed, you need to understand the truly massive impact

that removing bloom would have on the game. For example, the Fortnite community is always

pretty much unanimously against any kind of change thats a nerf to building. We saw it

with the explosive penetration damage change in season 6, saw it again with things like

the infinity sword and planes being able to ram through structures, and most recently

saw it when the boombox was added to the game. Removing bloom from weapons would easily be

one of the biggest nerfs to building in Fortnite history. The randomness of bloom in Fortnite

is what makes "reaction building" as it's called, so incredibly effective in so many

different scenarios. Let's say for example you're running in an open field with 0 protection,

and there's a guy about 40 meters away crouched, ready to open fire on you with his gold scar.

In the current version of Fortnite with bloom, he'll probably be able to shoot about 5 shots

before you're able to react and protect yourself. And, because of bloom, he'll probably hit

maybe 1-3 of those shots. That's definitely a considerable chunk of damage, but, at least

you'll be able to build and then have a chance in the rest of the fight. In the world of

Fortnite without bloom, if that player has even decent aim, he's probably shooting 5

shots before you can react and hitting 5 shots before you can react. And with the damage

that a gold scar does, you're most likely dead before you even know what happened. I

know people may disagree, but, I personally wouldn't want Fortnite to turn into that kind

of a game. Yeah, sure, it would emphasize things like being smart on rotations and utilizing

natural cover as much as possible, but, that isn't the type of game that Fortnite is. Even

though I didn't do it on purpose, I basically just described what PUBG is right there. I

think that what makes people love Fortnite so much is that because of building, you can

play incredibly aggressively 24/7 and still be able to consistently win game. And, it's

pretty much an undeniable fact that removing bloom would almost force you to play much

more passive because you could be lasered by an AR for all your health at any given

second. Also, building upon that, this change would be a pretty major nerf to practically

all of the shotguns in the game as well. Even though the shotgun meta in Fortnite has certainly

had its fair share of ups and downs, I think most people agree that shotguns in general

are good for Fortnite. They're definitely not perfect by any stretch of the imagination,

but they operate in a way where they're mostly really rewarding if you're accurate with them,

and you're going to struggle if you aren't. And just as a cherry on top, the shotgun meta

right now is as close to perfectly balanced as it's been in a while. What you saw in a

few of those shooting test #2 clips, is that silx would basically just use his AR in point-blank

fights, because with no bloom it basically did as much burst damage as any shotgun in

the game. And with shotguns, they work really well because they dp offer insane burst damage,

but if you can't get into a point blank range situation, they're totally useless. And if

ARs can laser people from long range while also being incredibly deadly close range,

it really messes with the fundamental way the game is played. But, it is definitely

possible that perfect accuracy would play out a lot differently if implemented into

fortnite now. And maybe a lot of the potential problems problems we discussed could be solved

with with something as simple as a considerable AR nerf, to make it so that they aren't absolutely

deadly at every range.

So, again I just want to make it clear that I'm not trying to say that bloom is a perfect

mechanic or that it shouldn't be changed. I think having such a major part of the game

being pretty heavily influenced by RNG is a bad thing, and I would love to see Epic

continue to try to improve Fortnite's shooting mechanics. I just wanted to point out that

removing bloom would have a much larger impact on the game than a lot of people realize.

And maybe for some of you, Fortnite being more like PUBG is something you would be really

in favor of. But for others, this may be an example of being careful what you wish for.

I think the overall best solution may be to keep bloom in game, yet continue to add more

weapons like the deagle and heavy AR, that when used correctly, aren't really affected

by bloom.

So, I hope you guys enjoyed this video and if you watched the entire thing be sure to

let me know with a comment down in the comment section below. I wanna know, After watching this video

are you team bloom or team no bloom? Let me know with a comment. Be sure to leave

a like, leave a comment, subscribe, turn on post notifications, do whatever the heck you

want, and I will catch you guys next time!

For more infomation >> This Is What Fortnite Was Like With NO Bloom... (Footage From Shooting Test #2) - Duration: 10:07.

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

What Is Populism? | History - Duration: 7:09.

For more infomation >> What Is Populism? | History - Duration: 7:09.

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

What is Gentle Chiropractic? - Duration: 4:12.

(gentle music)

- [Narrator] Located in the heart of Lenox Village,

Dr. Bill Hendon helps patients,

using his unique, gentle approach to chiropractic treatment.

- I knew from the very beginning

I wanted to focus on gentle chiropractic,

and learn these newer techniques

that would allow me to adjust people much more gently.

With that, I've been actually the first

torque release chiropractor in Tennessee.

I've been practicing it over 20 years,

and have adjusted thousands of patients.

We've seen everything there is to see.

Patients with major disc problems,

problems with TMJ migraines, extreme pain scenarios,

and just the easy cases where someone comes in

with low back pain or what have you.

They all respond well, 'cause getting pressure

off the nerve system allows the body to function better,

and therefore everything just functions better.

General chiropractor, they're gonna use their hands,

normally to manually adjust you,

where they take your spine and they put it to a point

to where they can cavitate the joints.

So there's some twisting,

and then the popping when they move,

they cavitate that joint.

And it can be a little uncomfortable at times.

And so what I like about the torque release technique

is you're lying in a neutral position.

There's no twisting of the joints.

They call it torque release because it also can get

the torque, the twisting, out of that misalignment.

So it adds a third dimension to the correction.

It's not only moving a bone, but it's also getting

the twisting out of that subluxation,

the bone that's out of alignment causing pressure on nerves.

More importantly, with this technique we can zero down

to the vertebral level where the problem is.

Meaning the one bone that's causing pressure on nerves,

we can get that freed up,

leave the rest of the uninvolved tissue alone.

That's how we get quicker results.

Also I use the gentle techniques to adjust extremities.

Sometimes the joints other than the spine

can get out of alignment and can cause problems.

People can have TMJ, shoulder problems, knee problems.

And we use the general method

with the instrument to address all those.

So just like with the spine,

we generally get quicker results,

more sustained results, and it's very gentle,

so there's no pain to the patient at all.

Patients tell me that it is very comfortable and enjoyable

to come into our office, from the very beginning.

We of course treat patients like they're family.

Here you're not gonna be a number.

Many patients comment that oh, maybe you have to wait

five or six minutes before I see the doctor,

but those are enjoyable five or six minutes

because I get to talk with Randy,

who's the office manager here

and is a very good conversationalist.

So from the very beginning, you're treated like family here,

and it's a very comfortable environment.

Also we have a little mascot,

a little dachshund named Sugar,

and people love petting on her as well.

Typically, what causes hesitation in seeking chiropractic

is just fear, fear of the unknown.

You might have heard chiropractic

can be uncomfortable or rough.

Well, with this new technique, this new procedure,

it's gentle so there's no reason to fear.

We're just taking the pressure off the nerve

with you lying in a comfortable, neutral position,

and so there's all the benefits without any of the fear.

So whether you've never experienced chiropractic before

or had a past experience with chiropractic

that was less than optimal,

please give us a call and we'd be happy to show you

the difference gentle chiropractic can make.

For more infomation >> What is Gentle Chiropractic? - Duration: 4:12.

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

This Is What It's Like To Be An Immigration Attorney In Trump's America (And It's Not Pretty) - News - Duration: 7:36.

The first time I realized something might be wrong, I was crying in the produce section of Costco.

I'd just seen a lawyer who works at the court where I practice and turned away before he could spot me. Like me, he was spending his weekend catching up on errands. The sight of someone whose job is to try to get people deported out buying a 30-pack of paper towels sent me over the edge. I couldn't stop the tears as I beelined toward the checkout.

Though I'd been spontaneously bursting into tears for weeks, this was the first time I had the self-awareness to think, "This cannot possibly be normal."

During law school and the many continuing legal trainings I attended each year, I was warned about "vicarious trauma" and "compassion fatigue," the complex mental strains that can quickly lead to complete burnout. Vicarious trauma was first conceptualized to explain changes in therapists' beliefs and expectations of the world after hearing graphic and painful stories from their clients. It now is now recognized to affect many different types of people who work in caretaking professions. Merriam-Webster defines compassion fatigue as "the physical and mental exhaustion and emotional withdrawal experienced by those who care for sick or traumatized people over an extended period of time."

As someone who works with indigent migrants facing extreme persecution in their home countries, I was at prime risk.

Despite this, the stubborn part of me believed that I had some sort of immunity to compassion fatigue. I've struggled with anxiety and depression since I was a preteen, but jumping into the fight had always buoyed me, not weighed me down. Being part of something bigger than myself and fighting against perceived wrongs made me feel better, not worse.

I thought of compassion and resilience kind of like hearts in video games ― when you completed a hard, emotionally draining challenge, you were rewarded with an additional heart, making you stronger over time. Under that logic, each hard case and even each loss made me stronger, more capable and more prepared for the next case and the next case.

But then I started crying in Costco, during date night with my wife and in bed in the middle of the night. After months of working exclusively with asylum-seekers under the Trump regime, I was experiencing the telltale signs of compassion fatigue.

Overcome by emotion, I tried to excise every single bad thing from my life. First, I banned any TV with stressful plots, watching only the Food Network and HGTV. Then I started to feel bad about the animals they cooked on the Food Network, and that was out too. HGTV was OK for a while until they started showing episodes of "House Hunters International" in which wealthy white Americans searched for dream beachfront properties in Central American countries my clients fled after being tortured. When several friends took winter vacations to Cuba, I stopped looking at Instagram, because I could not reconcile their sunny snapshots with the stories I heard from Cuban clients. My entire media consumption eventually revolved around "Gilmore Girls" and "The Great British Baking Show" episodes I'd seen before.

I skipped episodes of "Gilmore Girls" when the main characters fought too much, not sure if I could handle even the most benign conflict. Soon, even purely joyful moments like seeing my wife after she got back from a long work trip were tainted by the voice in the back of my head reminding me that so many of my clients would never see their families again.

It was almost reasonable, this idea that because I spent my workdays immersed in the cruelty of humankind that I would avoid the same trauma outside work. But eventually, it wasn't just outside of work. I felt so helpless and hopeless that I started to wonder why I even tried when it was so clear that there would be no end, no point at which we would arrive at some semblance of justice in our immigration system.

Losses started to seem inevitable. I got so anxious about work that I started taking carrying around a small pharmacy of pain relievers and anti-nausea medication to offset the stomachaches and migraines that plagued me. Even the wins felt hollow because I always was looking toward the next case, which I knew would break my heart all over again.

After my breakdown in Costco, I started looking for a solution. Everyone seemed to agree that I needed to first put on my own oxygen mask in the metaphorical plummeting airplane. But few were able to offer more suggestions than the infuriatingly vague "self-care."

In attempting to cure my compassion fatigue, I amassed so many sheet masks I could wallpaper my bathroom with them. Bottles of calming essential oils clutter my cupboard. When natural remedies fail, I have Ativan. But all the self-care in the world won't change the fact that I work in a place and within a system in which asylum cases are granted only around 3 percent of the time. The odds are always against my clients, and that is the root of the problem. It is hard to experience the relaxation promised by a lavender pillow mist when your clients are trapped in detention centers without access to proper hygiene or food.

Laura van Dernoot Lipsky, the author of Trauma Stewardship, writes that "people who are working to help those who suffer, or who are working to repair the world to prevent suffering, must somehow reconcile their own joy – the authentic wonder and delight in life – with the irrefutable fact of suffering in the world."

True joy feels far-fetched to me right now, but her book did change the way I thought about self-care. I stopped believing that taking care of myself had to look like something out of a women's magazine. Instead, I began to think about it more like a self-imposed jailbreak from the useless depressive martyrdom of refusing to allow myself to experience joy when so many that I work with are in the worst moments of their lives.

For now, I am starting there: trying to allow myself small moments of joy guilt-free. And so far, no joy has topped that of picking up newly released clients from the detention center. No matter what case is coming next, no matter how many cases were lost before this win, I am happy to have one afternoon, or even just an hour, or a moment, of happiness because right now, in this case, things went right.

I won't ever be entirely OK ― none of us should ever be fully OK ― when things are so objectively bad. But for now, I'm trying to stay in the fight for more joy, more justice, moment by moment.

Do you have a compelling personal story you'd like to see published on HuffPost? Find out what we're looking for here and send us a pitch!

For more infomation >> This Is What It's Like To Be An Immigration Attorney In Trump's America (And It's Not Pretty) - News - Duration: 7:36.

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

Battle of the Bridge was the hardest match I've refereed… thank goodness we now have VAR! 2019 - Duration: 3:34.

For more infomation >> Battle of the Bridge was the hardest match I've refereed… thank goodness we now have VAR! 2019 - Duration: 3:34.

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

MARK CLATTENBURG: Battle of the Bridge was hardest match I've refereed - Duration: 1:54.

The game in 2016 that has become known as 'The Battle of the Bridge' was by far the hardest match I have ever refereed

There was so much at stake and you could sense the tension. Tottenham needed to win to keep their title hopes alive and Chelsea had nothing to lose

 All week they had been talking about beating Spurs at all costs. You would imagine some needle from the likes of Diego Costa but players who rarely got into trouble started doing things you would never have expected from them

CHELSEA 2-2 TOTTENHAM  MAY 2, 2016, STAMFORD BRIDGECHELSEA (4-3-3): Begovic; Ivanovic, Terry, Cahill, Azpilicueta; Mikel Obi, Matic (Oscar 78); Willian, Fabregas, Pedro (Hazard 46); Costa

 Scorers: Cahill 58, Hazard 83.Manager: Guus Hiddink.TOTTENHAM (4-2-3-1): Lloris; Walker, Alderweireld (Chadli 90), Vertonghen, Rose (Davies 82); Dier, Dembele; Lamela, Eriksen, Son (Mason 65); Kane

Scorers: Kane 35, Son 44. Manager: Mauricio Pochettino.Referee: Mark Clattenburg.Booked players in bold Erik Lamela trod on Cesc Fabregas's hand, Mauricio Pochettino had to run on to the pitch to stop Danny Rose from clashing with Willian and Mousa Dembele scratched Costa's eye

Had I seen that last incident, Dembele would have been dismissed.Looking back, I should have sent off Eric Dier for a lunge on Eden Hazard towards the end

Refereeing this kind of match is a fine balancing act between applying the laws and managing the spectacle

There would have been few complaints if I had sent off four players that night but equally I could have been accused of ruining what was a great game

No matter what I had done, I don't think I could have won.Tuesday's referee, Michael Oliver, has taken charge of this match three times

 He will know what to expect — though it should be a more cagey affair given this is the first leg of a semi-final

The big difference this time is that VAR is in action. Dembele was subsequently banned for the incident with Costa but had technology been available, he would have been punished there and then

It is why I am astonished that Pochettino has said his players need to be naughty

That is not exactly the best thing to say when both clubs have urged their fans to behave themselves

He may be trying to get a reaction from his players — especially given this competition represents Tottenham's best chance of winning a trophy — but any dirty tricks at Wembley will be spotted and punished

For more infomation >> MARK CLATTENBURG: Battle of the Bridge was hardest match I've refereed - Duration: 1:54.

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

Teen says Subway is 'trying to kill her' after seeing what staff put in sandwich - News Live - Duration: 2:54.

A student has joked that staff at Subway are "trying to murder" her after opening her sandwich and seeing what was inside.

Noura Al Qaseer, 19, is a Glasgow University student who was on holiday in Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, when she decided to pop into the chain for a bite to eat.

As a regular, she knew exactly what she wanted so ordered a chicken peri peri and cheese sandwich on a fast food app, asking for extra jalapeños.

But she didn't watch him making it, so was shocked then she opened the sandwich and saw what was inside.

Completely shocked, Nora posted an image of the spicy sub to Twitter writing: "I asked for extra Jalapeños.

"I think the Subway guy wants to murder me."

The photo shows the 6" sub covered in about 50 jalapeños slices.

Noura said: "It is my usual order that I made up myself of Chicken peri peri, cheddar cheese, lettuce, green peppers, pickles, olives, jalapeños and thousand islands sauce on italian bread - but it was terrifyingly loaded with jalapeños.

"I was initially shocked but thought it was funny.

"It tasted okay but I had to take out some of the jalapeños otherwise I would've died.

"It went viral because whenever people ask for more jalapeños, they get only two pieces while I got like ten thousand."

Other people also found the photo hilarious and were quick to reply.

One wrote: "Oh wow that's a murder scene right there"

Another added: "I have to ask for extra jalapeños like 4 times to even get half of those."

But others thought it was brilliant, and many said it was the dream.

One women commented: "This is what I mean when I tell them I want extra"

Noura later later wrote: "It is a one way ticket to the toilet."

Speaking today, Noura said: "I ordered the sub on an app called "talabat". "It is my usual order that I made up myself of Chicken peri peri, cheddar cheese, lettuce, green peppers, pickles, olives, jalapeños and thousand islands sauce on italian bread - but it was terrifyingly loaded with jalapeños.

I was initially shocked but thought it was funny. It tasted okay but I had to take out some of the jalapeños otherwise I would've died. "It went viral because whenever people ask for more jalapeños, they get only two pieces while I got like ten thousand."

Mirror Online has contacted Subway for a comment.