When Jaskaran Dhillon was drafted in the third round by the Toronto Argonauts last month, he was deluged by ethnic media outlets in Vancouver celebrating the occasion since players of Indian descent are rare in the CFL.
On Wednesday, Sim Bhullar, a 7-foot-5 centre, worked out for his hometown Raptors, also attracting a media horde. He’s a 21-year-old who can dunk while standing on his tip-toes.
And last month, the movie Million Dollar Arm came out, based on the story of an agent who went to India in 2008 to recruit two talented cricket players with the hope of developing them into major league pitchers.
Even if their pro dreams die, these athletes are the leading edge of what some hope will one day be a wave of athletes with Indian backgrounds filling roster spots on North American pro sports teams.
The Toronto-born Bhullar, whose family is from the state of Punjab, hopes to be the first Indo-Canadian ever drafted into the NBA on June 26. He left New Mexico State following his sophomore year where he was voted Western Athletic Conference tournament MVP in leading the Aggies to the championship.
The interest in the Indian and the Punjab communities in Canada was so big for his Raptors workout, local ethnic media showed up excitedly at the Air Canada Centre to interview Bhullar. His college games were covered in Toronto’s Punjabi newspaper, Parvasi.
Bhullar said he hopes he can do for India what Yao Ming did for basketball in China, where the game became even more popular with kids and consumers in the world’s largest economy.
“Hopefully if I can make it and get to the next level, I can really go back there and impact the community,” Bhullar said. “I want to give back to the community out there. Especially growing up being a little kid, I always wanted to one of the NBA players to come to my community.
“I really want to be a role model for the kids and just open their eyes and know they can do anything they want. Anything they put their mind to.”
Bhullar said he doesn’t feel any pressure carrying the flag for India and wants to be a role model for others.
He’s used to such talk. In 2011, the New York Times wrote that Bhullar was poised to become the world’s first prominent men’s basketball player of Indian descent.
“There’s not really any pressure for me,” he said. “I had it for this long this far.”
He said there are more players in India with basketball talent, but they are lacking a place to showcase their skills.
Bhullar wants to make a difference in that area.
Bhullar said basketball courts are being built across the country and many more are picking up the game.
“It’s more pride,” he said. “I just want to be the best I can be and inspire some young guys. It really helps our community take a step forward. It brings a positive light to our community.
Dhillon, at 6-foot-3 and 290 pounds, can also trace his family roots to the Punjab area.
Dhillon felt family pressure to play soccer growing up in B.C., but he didn’t really like it. He fell in love with the gridiron game watching the NFL and the Denver Broncos became his favourite team.
Rupan Bal, of Punjab-based PTC (PTCnetwork.ca) that broadcasts out of Toronto, grew up playing basketball in India and cautions that developing more talent will take time.
He played high school basketball in Amritsar, and the only reason he played was that it was a Canadian-oriented school. He started playing basketball in Grade 5, but “it was not really that great.”
He said the national basketball program is on a par with high school basketball in Canada.
Social media is also responsible for raising the profile of emerging stars like Bhullar in the Punjab community.
“In Canada, in every Punjabi community, he (Bhullar) is really popular because of his height and the fact that he is the first one to make it to the NBA draft,” Bal said. “People want to take pictures wherever he walks.”
Bal added that he thinks there is pressure on Bhullar to do well in basketball because of his heritage.
“As Punjabi Canadians, we are looking for someone from our community to break the barrier and bring two generations together. What happens is the generation from my parent’s era didn’t really support sports. They don’t believe in sports. Studies is the only option. So someone breaking through this, they will visualize a new picture.”
Thursday, June 12, 2014
Monday, June 9, 2014
The Telephone
Early Telephone Development
In 1729 English chemist Stephen Gray transmitted electricity over a wire. He sent charges nearly 300 feet over brass wire and moistened thread. An electrostatic generator powered his experiments, one charge at a time. A few years later, Dutchman Pieter van Musschenbroek and German Ewald Georg von Kleist in 1746 independently developed the Leyden jar, a sort of battery or condenser for storing static electricity. Named for its Holland city of invention, the jar was a glass bottle lined inside and out with tin or lead. The glass sandwiched between the metal sheets stored electricity; a strong charge could be kept for a few days and transported. Over the years these jars were used in countless experiments, lectures, and demonstrations.In 1753 an anonymous writer, possibly physician Charles Morrison, suggested in The Scot's Magazine that electricity might transmit messages. He thought up a scheme using separate wires to represent each letter. An electrostatic generator, he posited, could electrify each line in turn, attracting a bit of paper by static charge on the other end. By noting which paper letters were attracted one might spell out a message. Needing wires by the dozen, signals got transmitted a mile or two. People labored with telegraphs like this for many decades. Experiments continued slowly until 1800. Many inventors worked alone, misunderstood earlier discoveries, or spent time producing results already achieved. Poor equipment didn't help either.
Balky electrostatic generators produced static electricity by friction, often by spinning leather against glass. And while static electricity could make hair stand on end or throw sparks, it couldn't provide the energy to do truly useful things. Inventors and industry needed a reliable and continuous current.
In 1800 Alessandro Volta produced the first battery. A major development, Volta's battery provided sustained low powered electric current at high cost. Chemically based, as all batteries are, the battery improved quickly and became the electrical source for further experimenting. But while batteries got more reliable, they still couldn't produce the power needed to work machinery, light cities, or provide heat. And although batteries would work telegraph and telephone systems, and still do, transmitting speech required understanding two related elements, namely, electricity and magnetism.
In 1820 Danish physicist Christian Oersted discovered electromagnetism, the critical idea needed to develop electrical power and to communicate. In a famous experiment at his University of Copenhagen classroom, Oersted pushed a compass under a live electric wire. This caused its needle to turn from pointing north, as if acted on by a larger magnet. Oersted discovered that an electric current creates a magnetic field. But could a magnetic field create electricity? If so, a new source of power beckoned. And the principle of electromagnetism, if fully understood and applied, promised a new era of communication
In 1821 Michael Faraday reversed Oersted's experiment and in so doing discovered induction. He got a weak current to flow in a wire revolving around a permanent magnet. In other words, a magnetic field caused or induced an electric current to flow in a nearby wire. In so doing, Faraday had built the world's first electric generator. Mechanical energy could now be converted to electrical energy. Is that clear? This is a very important point.
The simple act of moving ones' hand caused current to move. Mechanical energy into electrical energy. Although many years away, a turbine powered dynamo would let the power of flowing water or burning coal produce electricity. Got a river or a dam? The water spins the turbines which turns the generators which produce electricity. The more water you have the more generators you can add and the more electricity you can produce. Mechanical energy into electrical energy.
Faraday worked through different electrical problems in the next ten years, eventually publishing his results on induction in 1831. By that year many people were producing electrical dynamos. But electromagnetism still needed understanding. Someone had to show how to use it for communicating.
In 1830 the great American scientist Professor Joseph Henry transmitted the first practical electrical signal. A short time before Henry had invented the first efficient electromagnet. He also concluded similar thoughts about induction before Faraday but he didn't publish them first. Henry's place in electrical history however, has always been secure, in particular for showing that electromagnetism could do more than create current or pick up heavy weights -- it could communicate.In a stunning demonstration in his Albany Academy classroom, Henry created the forerunner of the telegraph. In the demonstration, Henry first built an electromagnet by winding an iron bar with several feet of wire. A pivot mounted steel bar sat next to the magnet. A bell, in turn, stood next to the bar. From the electromagnet Henry strung a mile of wire around the inside of the classroom. He completed the circuit by connecting the ends of the wires at a battery. Guess what happened? The steel bar swung toward the magnet, of course, striking the bell at the same time. Breaking the connection released the bar and it was free to strike again. And while Henry did not pursue electrical signaling, he did help someone who did. And that man was Samuel Finley Breese Morse.
From the December, 1963 American Heritage magazine, "a sketch of Henry's primitive telegraph, a dozen years before Morse, reveals the essential components: an electromagnet activated by a distant battery, and a pivoted iron bar that moves to ring a bell." See the two books listed to the left for more information.
In 1837 Samuel Morse invented the first workable telegraph, applied for its patent in 1838, and was finally granted it in 1848. Joseph Henry helped Morse build a telegraph relay or repeater that allowed long distance operation. The telegraph later helped unite the country and eventually the world. Not a professional inventor, Morse was nevertheless captivated by electrical experiments. In 1832 he heard of Faraday's recently published work on inductance, and was given an electromagnet at the same time to ponder over. An idea came to him and Morse quickly worked out details for his telegraph.
Thursday, June 5, 2014
Why we can't buy some popular European cars in Canada
Mercedes-Benz, Volkswagen and Audi all say it’s time regulatory standards were harmonized, allowing more choice, faster access and lower prices on European models.
The global auto standards issue recently resurfaced in the wake of the tentative free trade agreement between Canada and the European Union’s 28 countries. If ratified in about two years’ time, the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) will allow for the free flow of goods for everything from Italian wine to French bread to pork bellies and Porsches.
CETA would also gradually eliminate the 6.1-per-cent tariff on European cars imported to Canada, over seven years.
In December, Tim Reuss, president of Mercedes-Benz Canada, questioned the notion that Canada’s standards are better: “Are you really going to say that a car that has been deemed safe enough and environmentally okay for Europe is not environmentally okay and safe to be driven in Canada or vice versa?”
Veteran auto analyst Dennis DesRosiers says Reuss’s comment is dead on. “He’s got it summarized in the most cogent way I’ve ever read.”
The gap is not just with Europe; standards even differ between Canada and the United States – on the height of a seatbelt or bumper and daytime running lights, says DesRosiers.
“We don’t need Canadian-specific regulations,” says Global Automakers of Canada president David Adams.
But Transport Canada insists we do. The government department that is responsible for and oversees policies and regulations for the vehicles we drive, also points to “Canadian-specific factors” such as geography, road and weather conditions and driver training as reasons we do need our own standards.
Meanwhile, DesRosiers warns eliminating these standards is no easy task. “Canada has to get the U.S. on side before it meets the EU standard. It becomes politically complex; there are egos and science and economics in the way.”
But Transport Canada defends its differences by saying it has “several significant vehicle safety requirements which are more stringent in Canada than in Europe.” The strength of the anchoring system for child seats and rear crash test speed are two examples (See sidebar).
It’s tough to pinpoint exactly how much Canada’s own auto testing adds to the MSRP, but everyone agrees it is a significant cost. “It’s much higher than the tariff imposed,” says DesRosiers. “You can easily get into a $1,000-to-$5,000 increase because of the standard differential of a cost or higher … but we don’t know for sure.”
Don Mertens, spokesperson for Volkswagen and Audi, agrees Canada-only standards are unnecessary, and hopes CETA will bring new flexibility.
“We don’t have all the fine details about the free-trade agreement, but we hope there will be more acceptance of UNEC (United Economic Commission for Europe) standards.”
There has been a worldwide move in the industry to try to forge a global standard, DesRosiers says. But the long evolution of North American standards makes them difficult to negotiate or eliminate. Standards were ramped up after consumer advocate Ralph Nader’s 1965 book, Unsafe At Any Speed, accused the auto industry of disregarding safety standards.
“The need for regulatory standards became more intense with that book,” says DesRosiers. In those days, there wasn’t a global auto industry as we know it today.
The United States created its Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards while the United Nations Economic Commission crafted another set for Europe and those are also followed by Japan and China. Canada follows many of the rules set by the United States, but layers on its unique standards.
DesRosiers fears free-trade agreements, like CETA, will slow the shift to one set of standards because they are used as “negotiating chips.” But Adams insists auto makers would prefer one set of global regulations. And, through CETA, Canada has the chance to take the lead by eliminating overlaps in regulatory testing.
“Canada’s tradition has been to follow the U.S. in its regulatory environment,” says Adams. “Now we have an opportunity. Do we want to sit back and wait for the U.S.?”
Transport Canada says it is open to developing or reviewing existing standards “as long as they fulfill national objectives.” The agency continues to “actively participate in the development of global technical regulations under the auspices of the World Forum for the harmonization of Vehicle Regulations”
Reuss points to two models that could come to Canada right away if European standards were accepted: the Mercedes A-Class subcompact with new technology, featuring brake lights that flash if a car is approaching too quickly from behind, and the all-wheel-drive version of the Sprinter commercial van.
Mertens would like to see “harmonization-plus.” He says we should be able to expand, at minimum, some European advanced technology and add some European standards to Canada’s regime, citing advanced lighting and the latest in clean diesel.
“For us, it’s technology that helps the consumer, whether it’s safety technologies, but certainly engine choices,” he says. “We need to accept European standards that benefit the consumer."
Thomas Tetzlaf, also of Volkswagen and Audi, is convinced the enhanced choice would be a win with car enthusiasts.
“Many of them call us immediately upon return from summer vacation in Europe … and ask us why we can’t the get the ‘blank’ … or this engine in North America.”
Adams and DesRosiers both argue that Canadian consumers are more open to Euro-style diesels, subcompacts and hatchbacks – people like Kenney, who pines for the sporty Scirocco.
“I’ve always been a big VW fan,” he says. “When I get in, I always know what it’s going to feel like. The fit, the finish and interior design; they take it much more seriously.”
A comparison of Canadian and U.S. Prices:
The global auto standards issue recently resurfaced in the wake of the tentative free trade agreement between Canada and the European Union’s 28 countries. If ratified in about two years’ time, the Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement (CETA) will allow for the free flow of goods for everything from Italian wine to French bread to pork bellies and Porsches.
CETA would also gradually eliminate the 6.1-per-cent tariff on European cars imported to Canada, over seven years.
In December, Tim Reuss, president of Mercedes-Benz Canada, questioned the notion that Canada’s standards are better: “Are you really going to say that a car that has been deemed safe enough and environmentally okay for Europe is not environmentally okay and safe to be driven in Canada or vice versa?”
Veteran auto analyst Dennis DesRosiers says Reuss’s comment is dead on. “He’s got it summarized in the most cogent way I’ve ever read.”
The gap is not just with Europe; standards even differ between Canada and the United States – on the height of a seatbelt or bumper and daytime running lights, says DesRosiers.
“We don’t need Canadian-specific regulations,” says Global Automakers of Canada president David Adams.
But Transport Canada insists we do. The government department that is responsible for and oversees policies and regulations for the vehicles we drive, also points to “Canadian-specific factors” such as geography, road and weather conditions and driver training as reasons we do need our own standards.
Meanwhile, DesRosiers warns eliminating these standards is no easy task. “Canada has to get the U.S. on side before it meets the EU standard. It becomes politically complex; there are egos and science and economics in the way.”
But Transport Canada defends its differences by saying it has “several significant vehicle safety requirements which are more stringent in Canada than in Europe.” The strength of the anchoring system for child seats and rear crash test speed are two examples (See sidebar).
It’s tough to pinpoint exactly how much Canada’s own auto testing adds to the MSRP, but everyone agrees it is a significant cost. “It’s much higher than the tariff imposed,” says DesRosiers. “You can easily get into a $1,000-to-$5,000 increase because of the standard differential of a cost or higher … but we don’t know for sure.”
Don Mertens, spokesperson for Volkswagen and Audi, agrees Canada-only standards are unnecessary, and hopes CETA will bring new flexibility.
“We don’t have all the fine details about the free-trade agreement, but we hope there will be more acceptance of UNEC (United Economic Commission for Europe) standards.”
There has been a worldwide move in the industry to try to forge a global standard, DesRosiers says. But the long evolution of North American standards makes them difficult to negotiate or eliminate. Standards were ramped up after consumer advocate Ralph Nader’s 1965 book, Unsafe At Any Speed, accused the auto industry of disregarding safety standards.
“The need for regulatory standards became more intense with that book,” says DesRosiers. In those days, there wasn’t a global auto industry as we know it today.
The United States created its Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards while the United Nations Economic Commission crafted another set for Europe and those are also followed by Japan and China. Canada follows many of the rules set by the United States, but layers on its unique standards.
DesRosiers fears free-trade agreements, like CETA, will slow the shift to one set of standards because they are used as “negotiating chips.” But Adams insists auto makers would prefer one set of global regulations. And, through CETA, Canada has the chance to take the lead by eliminating overlaps in regulatory testing.
“Canada’s tradition has been to follow the U.S. in its regulatory environment,” says Adams. “Now we have an opportunity. Do we want to sit back and wait for the U.S.?”
Transport Canada says it is open to developing or reviewing existing standards “as long as they fulfill national objectives.” The agency continues to “actively participate in the development of global technical regulations under the auspices of the World Forum for the harmonization of Vehicle Regulations”
Reuss points to two models that could come to Canada right away if European standards were accepted: the Mercedes A-Class subcompact with new technology, featuring brake lights that flash if a car is approaching too quickly from behind, and the all-wheel-drive version of the Sprinter commercial van.
Mertens would like to see “harmonization-plus.” He says we should be able to expand, at minimum, some European advanced technology and add some European standards to Canada’s regime, citing advanced lighting and the latest in clean diesel.
“For us, it’s technology that helps the consumer, whether it’s safety technologies, but certainly engine choices,” he says. “We need to accept European standards that benefit the consumer."
Thomas Tetzlaf, also of Volkswagen and Audi, is convinced the enhanced choice would be a win with car enthusiasts.
“Many of them call us immediately upon return from summer vacation in Europe … and ask us why we can’t the get the ‘blank’ … or this engine in North America.”
Adams and DesRosiers both argue that Canadian consumers are more open to Euro-style diesels, subcompacts and hatchbacks – people like Kenney, who pines for the sporty Scirocco.
“I’ve always been a big VW fan,” he says. “When I get in, I always know what it’s going to feel like. The fit, the finish and interior design; they take it much more seriously.”
A comparison of Canadian and U.S. Prices:
| Vehicle | Canadian Price | U.S. Price |
| 2014 Ford F-150 | $17,999 | $24,445 |
| 2014 Chevrolet Corvette | $52,475 | $51,000 |
| 2014 Toyota Prius | $26,105 | $24,200 |
| 2014 Toyota Camry | $23,750 | $22,425 |
| 2014 Honda Civic | $15,690 | $18,390 |
| 2014 Porsche Boxster S | $70,900 | $62,100 |
| Porsche 911 Turbo S Cabriolet | $221,200 | $193,900 |
| Audi R8 | $134,000 | $114,900 |
| 2014 BMW M6 Cabriolet | $128,900 | $117,500 |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)