Latest news with #ArtsandSciences
Hindustan Times
05-07-2025
- Science
- Hindustan Times
Can your mixed emotions make you a better thinker? New science says they can
How does one explain the exhilaration and fear of moving to a new city? The ache of sadness and gratitude at the end of a long-awaited trip? The grief and relief just after a breakup? Can people truly feel both positive and negative emotions at the same time, or do we just rapidly flip back and forth between them? For over 150 years, neuroscientists and researchers have been trying to answer this question, not just because it is intriguing, but because it has implications for how we deal with risk, navigate new experiences, and process input from our world. Before we unpack some of this, a brief look back. Since Charles Darwin's publication of The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals in 1872, emotions have been studied as mental states that cause stereotypical bodily expressions: the smile, the shrug, the sneer. More recently, researchers have named and studied phenomena such as dimorphous expression, which is when a person experiences a strong emotion of one kind and expresses it as cues linked to a very different feeling, the most common example being tears of joy. Dimorphous expressions likely hark back to a time before language, when humans struggled to convey the idea of extreme joy or grief or embarrassment. Struggling to regain emotional balance or convey, 'Yes, I'm happy, but how do I tell you how happy this has made me,' tears spring to the eyes and do the job. Mixed emotions have been harder to study, requiring brain scans just to confirm their existence. It was only last year that psychologists and neuroscientists at the University of Southern California (USC) Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences proved, for instance, that the brain does in fact display distinct neural signatures when experiencing mixed emotions. (The paper was published in the journal Cerebral Cortex.) 'Mixed emotions like bittersweet and nostalgia are fascinating because they reflect how our brain can weigh multiple timelines and values at once — what matters now, what mattered in the past, and what will matter later,' says neuroscientist Anthony Vaccaro, who led the USC study as a postdoctoral researcher and is now a research assistant professor at University of North Carolina. This is new information to us as a species. Do you have a name for that? The traditional scientific view, until the 20th century, was that emotions were simple responses arranged on a single scale, from positive at one end to negative on the other. By the 1960s, there was a renaissance of sorts in the field of psychology, with researchers shifting towards nuanced theories that recognised emotions as individual interpretations of certain situations rather than a direct and somewhat universal response to them. It turns out the brain is even more complicated than that. How we described our emotions — the words we use, and the emotional culture in which we are raised — can affect how nimbly the brain navigates, for instance, two contrasting emotions at once. In 2011, researchers at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development in Berlin and University of Zurich described the German word sehnsucht (a longing for an ideal but unobtainable circumstance) to one group of people from Germany and another from the US and found that the Americans associated more negative feelings with the idea than the Germans did. (Their findings were published in the journal Developmental Psychology.) The sense of comfort vs discomfort with mixed emotions appears to be a key cultural influence, says Vaccaro. Eastern cultures value mixed emotions more and therefore, are more comfortable with them. 'This may have something to do with having more easily identifiable words for these feelings, or just cultural values about the vital roles of both pleasure and pain.' A higher calling Let's pause there for a minute: Why do the vital roles of both pleasure and pain matter? Well, in plenty of complex scenarios, we would miss out on crucial information if we could only consciously experience one or the other. Take the heartache-and-pride a parent feels as their child leaves home to live alone for the first time. 'If we only felt the negativity, we might try to hold on too tight or avoid raising independent kids altogether. At the same time, if we only focused on the future positive feelings of raising a self-sufficient adult, we might miss out on the emotional richness of the journey to that point,' says Vaccaro. It is by embracing mixed emotions, in many ways, that we grow and gain the richest life experience, during intense and complex times. The lessons we thus learn help with decision-making and aid our evolution as individuals. In a simple example, the combination of excitement and fear we feel when facing a new challenge — whether one's first skydive or a new job — makes us want to take the plunge, where plain fear would have prompted us to step back. But we also go in cautious, alert and well-prepared (that's fear, playing its ancient role). In an interesting detail, the neural activity that reflects this simultaneous experience of two emotions occurs in neocortical regions responsible for abstract thinking and conflict resolution. 'These 'higher' regions of the brain are the ones able to process this complex dynamic, letting us hold all this information together as one unified mixed feeling in our consciousness,' Vaccaro says. The bittersweet spot Can we use mixed emotions to our benefit? 'Our lives are filled with change, and we change a lot ourselves. Embracing mixed emotions may help people have a coherent personal narrative of who they are, and their albeit-shifting goals and values, as things change,' Vaccaro says. They are an essential aid to scepticism, which takes on added significance in our world of increasingly black-and-white oversimplification. 'They let us feel the tension of nuance — like feeling hope and worry simultaneously about a new technology or social change,' Vaccaro says. 'That emotional complexity can make us better thinkers.'
New Statesman
18-06-2025
- Politics
- New Statesman
Dominic Cummings: oracle of the new British berserk
Photo by James Manning/PA The woman next to me wanted more on Nikolay Chernyshevsky. She'd been reading about him and was telling me how his ideas about utopian socialist communes are gaining increasing traction on the American right. The talk was titled 'What Is to Be Done?', an allusion to his most famous work. How had he not been mentioned? If you're wondering which event could pull this sort of crowd, we'd been listening to Dominic Cummings. On 11 June, he spoke to a packed Sheldonian Theatre over the pealing bells of a midsummer Oxford evening. In the audience were the university's male nerdfolk, in their standard sky-blue shirts and navy trousers, an assortment of academics and curious civilians. Above us was the theatre's scarlet and brimstone ceiling fresco, titled 'Truth Descending upon the Arts and Sciences to Expel Ignorance from the University'. Introducing Cummings, Professor Nigel Biggar called him an 'oracle'. He didn't look like one. The outfit was of the same pedigree as throughout his latest and ongoing media campaign: red-and-white baseball cap, the same sneakers he mows the lawn in and a polo shirt in storm-cloud grey. The only upgrade in Cummings' 2025 couture has been a pair of finely wired aviator-style spectacles, elevating the look to one of a briefly heralded 2010s house DJ. And he didn't sound like an oracle either – if oracles are supposed to speak in looping epigrams. As during his career as a freelance critic of the British state, Cummings was clear and frightening. He is a rhetorician of simple invective. Our governing 'regime has become cancerous', he opened, in a speech that also mentioned 'industrialised mass rape', 'stupid [small] boats', 'stupid old tanks', and a 'constant jihad' waged against skilled migration within the Home Office. He was here to tell us how to fix it all. If there is such a thing as a Cummings critique, this represented its most comprehensive digest. He recited his current favourite examples of state failure – fugitive terrorists using human rights law to sue the Ministry of Defence, deep-state officials murmuring of riots in the provinces, politicians who hide from responsibility behind the scripts of their civil service administrators. He connected this with his current favourite historical parallel: the crisis of capitalism, technology and ideology of the 1840s, which he compares to the revolutions in AI and 'biological engineering' in Silicon Valley about to 'smash into all our lives'. Cassandra in tracksuit bottoms, then. And given the scale of this upheaval, the corresponding Cummings programme is remarkably precise, but limited. His great theme is, to put it facetiously, paperwork management. Government should be narrower, sharper, modelled after the administrations of Pitt the Younger (he speaks as if there is no difference between late-18th-century carronade procurement and modern bureaucracy). The Cabinet Office should be shuttered. 'Science and technology' should be embedded in the prime minister's office. Only then will we 'at least have a functioning regime that can build things'. Cummings is probably Westminster's most influential public intellectual, at least among its media-Spad-apparatchik networks. It is odd, therefore, how little actual politics intrudes in his work or recommendations (in this potted account of 20th-century history, the development of socialism and fascism came and went in two sentences). What matters instead is the cyclical appearance of material crises and the attempts of political elites to manage them. Though his present case studies are so extreme as to be unverifiable (in the Q&A after his talk, Cummings alleged an active conspiracy to cover up the grooming gangs inside the Department for Education in the early 2010s), his arguments come laced with what feels like sincerity. Outrage at terminal decline is the best form of patriotism the political right can muster. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Britain has seen similar outbursts at times of failure. In his claims of discontent among special forces and military intelligence, in his thunderous warnings of ethnic-sectarian civil warfare, Cummings has acquired the frantic disposition of mid-1970s British officials. Watching him, the person who came to my mind was William Armstrong, another chief adviser to a prime minister (Ted Heath), and another man once considered the true power in No 10. He too was prone to dark, rambling introspections about the state of Britain; in 1974, on a rain-lashed government away day at a stately Oxfordshire home, he suffered a nervous breakdown during which he stripped naked, furiously smoked cigarettes and ranted about Red Armies and the collapse of the world order. Dominic Cummings is nowhere near such a state of dissolution. His arguments about the structural depth of Britain's dysfunction are increasingly axiomatic on the left and right. And there is nothing academic about his pronouncements: Westminster is full of rumour about the extent of his associations with Nigel Farage and Robert Jenrick, and a project to 'unite the right'. However, like Armstrong, he is a man who has been driven berserk by his exposure to state failure. His reforms for government, pitched somewhere between the Hanoverian and the Singaporean model, may or may not be a solution. But his allegations, and his very Russian vision of a politics wracked by elemental forces, are, at the very least, a vivid symptom of this bout of British sickness. Related
Nahar Net
18-06-2025
- Politics
- Nahar Net
US and Iran have long complicated history, far beyond Israel's strikes on Tehran
Jeffrey Fields USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences Relations between the United States and Iran have been fraught for decades – at least since the U.S. helped overthrow a democracy-minded prime minister, Mohammed Mossadegh, in August 1953. The U.S. then supported the long, repressive reign of the Shah of Iran, whose security services brutalized Iranian citizens for decades. The two countries have been particularly hostile to each other since Iranian students took over the U.S. Embassy in Tehran in November 1979, resulting in economic sanctions and the severing of formal diplomatic relations between the nations. Since 1984, the U.S. State Department has listed Iran as a "state sponsor of terrorism," alleging the Iranian government provides terrorists with training, money and weapons. Some of the major events in U.S.-Iran relations highlight the differences between the nations' views, but others arguably presented real opportunities for reconciliation. 1953: US overthrows Mossadegh In 1951, the Iranian Parliament chose a new prime minister, Mossadegh, who then led lawmakers to vote in favor of taking over the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, expelling the company's British owners and saying they wanted to turn oil profits into investments in the Iranian people. The U.S. feared disruption in the global oil supply and worried about Iran falling prey to Soviet influence. The British feared the loss of cheap Iranian oil. President Dwight Eisenhower decided it was best for the U.S. and the U.K. to get rid of Mossadegh. Operation Ajax, a joint CIA-British operation, convinced the Shah of Iran, the country's monarch, to dismiss Mossadegh and drive him from office by force. Mossadegh was replaced by a much more Western-friendly prime minister, handpicked by the CIA. 1979: Revolutionaries oust the shah, take hostages After more than 25 years of relative stability in U.S.-Iran relations, the Iranian public had grown unhappy with the social and economic conditions that developed under the dictatorial rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Pahlavi enriched himself and used American aid to fund the military while many Iranians lived in poverty. Dissent was often violently quashed by SAVAK, the shah's security service. In January 1979, the shah left Iran, ostensibly to seek cancer treatment. Two weeks later, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned from exile in Iraq and led a drive to abolish the monarchy and proclaim an Islamic government. In October 1979, President Jimmy Carter agreed to allow the shah to come to the U.S. to seek advanced medical treatment. Outraged Iranian students stormed the U.S. Embassy in Tehran on Nov. 4, taking 52 Americans hostage. That convinced Carter to sever U.S. diplomatic relations with Iran on April 7, 1980. Two weeks later, the U.S. military launched a mission to rescue the hostages, but it failed, with aircraft crashes killing eight U.S. servicemembers. The shah died in Egypt in July 1980, but the hostages weren't released until Jan. 20, 1981, after 444 days of captivity. 1980-1988: US tacitly sides with Iraq In September 1980, Iraq invaded Iran, an escalation of the two countries' regional rivalry and religious differences: Iraq was governed by Sunni Muslims but had a Shia Muslim majority population; Iran was led and populated mostly by Shiites. The U.S. was concerned that the conflict would limit the flow of Middle Eastern oil and wanted to ensure the conflict didn't affect its close ally, Saudi Arabia. The U.S. supported Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein in his fight against the anti-American Iranian regime. As a result, the U.S. mostly turned a blind eye toward Iraq's use of chemical weapons against Iran. U.S. officials moderated their usual opposition to those illegal and inhumane weapons because the U.S. State Department did not "wish to play into Iran's hands by fueling its propaganda against Iraq." In 1988, the war ended in a stalemate. More than 500,000 military and 100,000 civilians died. 1981-1986: US secretly sells weapons to Iran The U.S. imposed an arms embargo after Iran was designated a state sponsor of terrorism in 1984. That left the Iranian military, in the middle of its war with Iraq, desperate for weapons and aircraft and vehicle parts to keep fighting. The Reagan administration decided that the embargo would likely push Iran to seek support from the Soviet Union, the U.S.'s Cold War rival. Rather than formally end the embargo, U.S. officials agreed to secretly sell weapons to Iran starting in 1981. The last shipment, of anti-tank missiles, was in October 1986. In November 1986, a Lebanese magazine exposed the deal. That revelation sparked the Iran-Contra scandal in the U.S., with Reagan's officials found to have collected money from Iran for the weapons and illegally sent those funds to anti-socialist rebels – the Contras – in Nicaragua. 1988: US Navy shoots down Iran Air flight 655 On the morning of July 8, 1988, the USS Vincennes, a guided missile cruiser patrolling in the international waters of the Persian Gulf, entered Iranian territorial waters while in a skirmish with Iranian gunboats. Either during or just after that exchange of gunfire, the Vincennes crew mistook a passing civilian Airbus passenger jet for an Iranian F-14 fighter. They shot it down, killing all 290 people aboard. The U.S. called it a "tragic and regrettable accident," but Iran believed the plane's downing was intentional. In 1996, the U.S. agreed to pay US$131.8 million in compensation to Iran. 1997-1998: The US seeks contact In August 1997, a moderate reformer, Mohammad Khatami, won Iran's presidential election. U.S. President Bill Clinton sensed an opportunity. He sent a message to Tehran through the Swiss ambassador there, proposing direct government-to-government talks. Shortly thereafter, in early January 1998, Khatami gave an interview to CNN in which he expressed "respect for the great American people," denounced terrorism and recommended an "exchange of professors, writers, scholars, artists, journalists and tourists" between the United States and Iran. However, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei didn't agree, so not much came of the mutual overtures as Clinton's time in office came to an end. In his 2002 State of the Union address, President George W. Bush characterized Iran, Iraq and North Korea as constituting an "Axis of Evil" supporting terrorism and pursuing weapons of mass destruction, straining relations even further. 2002: Iran's nuclear program raises alarm In August 2002, an exiled rebel group announced that Iran had been secretly working on nuclear weapons at two installations that had not previously been publicly revealed. That was a violation of the terms of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, which Iran had signed, requiring countries to disclose their nuclear-related facilities to international inspectors. One of those formerly secret locations, Natanz, housed centrifuges for enriching uranium, which could be used in civilian nuclear reactors or enriched further for weapons. Starting in roughly 2005, U.S. and Israeli government cyberattackers together reportedly targeted the Natanz centrifuges with a custom-made piece of malicious software that became known as Stuxnet. That effort, which slowed down Iran's nuclear program was one of many U.S. and international attempts – mostly unsuccessful – to curtail Iran's progress toward building a nuclear bomb. 2003: Iran writes to Bush administration In May 2003, senior Iranian officials quietly contacted the State Department through the Swiss embassy in Iran, seeking "a dialogue 'in mutual respect,'" addressing four big issues: nuclear weapons, terrorism, Palestinian resistance and stability in Iraq. Hardliners in the Bush administration weren't interested in any major reconciliation, though Secretary of State Colin Powell favored dialogue and other officials had met with Iran about al-Qaida. When Iranian hardliner Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was elected president of Iran in 2005, the opportunity died. The following year, Ahmadinejad made his own overture to Washington in an 18-page letter to President Bush. The letter was widely dismissed; a senior State Department official told me in profane terms that it amounted to nothing. 2015: Iran nuclear deal signed After a decade of unsuccessful attempts to rein in Iran's nuclear ambitions, the Obama administration undertook a direct diplomatic approach beginning in 2013. Two years of secret, direct negotiations initially bilaterally between the U.S. and Iran and later with other nuclear powers culminated in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, often called the Iran nuclear deal. Two years of secret, direct negotiations conducted bilaterally at first between the U.S. and Iran and later with other nuclear powers culminated in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, often called the Iran nuclear deal. Iran, the U.S., China, France, Germany, Russia and the United Kingdom signed the deal in 2015. It severely limited Iran's capacity to enrich uranium and mandated that international inspectors monitor and enforce Iran's compliance with the agreement. In return, Iran was granted relief from international and U.S. economic sanctions. Though the inspectors regularly certified that Iran was abiding by the agreement's terms, President Donald Trump withdrew from the agreement in May 2018. 2020: US drones kill Iranian Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani On Jan. 3, 2020, an American drone fired a missile that killed Maj. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the leader of Iran's elite Quds Force. Analysts considered Soleimani the second most powerful man in Iran, after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. At the time, the Trump administration asserted that Soleimani was directing an imminent attack against U.S. assets in the region, but officials have not provided clear evidence to support that claim. Iran responded by launching ballistic missiles that hit two American bases in Iraq. 2023: The Oct. 7 attacks on Israel Hamas' brazen attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, provoked a fearsome militarized response from Israel that continues today and served to severely weaken Iran's proxies in the region, especially Hamas – the perpetrator of the attacks – and Hezbollah in Lebanon. 2025: Trump 2.0 and Iran Trump saw an opportunity to forge a new nuclear deal with Iran and to pursue other business deals with Tehran. Once inaugurated for his second term, Trump appointed Steve Witkoff, a real estate investor who is the president's friend, to serve as special envoy for the Middle East and to lead negotiations. Negotiations for a nuclear deal between Washington and Tehran began in April, but the countries did not reach a deal. They were planning a new round of talks when Israel struck Iran with a series of airstrikes on June 13, forcing the White House to reconsider is position. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article here:
Yahoo
22-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
'Truly exceptional': LCCC celebrates largest graduating class in college's history
CHEYENNE — Laramie County Community College staff, administrators and students celebrated the largest graduating class in the college's 57-year history with 976 degrees and certificates awarded over the course of three different commencement ceremonies Saturday. 'That is truly exceptional,' said LCCC President Joe Schaffer. The schools of Arts and Sciences; Business, Agriculture and Technical Studies; and Health Sciences and Wellness each held a separate ceremony at the Blue Federal Credit Union Recreation and Athletics Complex on the Cheyenne campus. Parents, grandparents, daughters, sons, siblings and friends filled the bleachers on either side of the gymnasium. Many brought flowers for their grad, and a few others made giant poster boards with colorful lettering. Loved ones cheered from the side as each grad waltzed across the stage to accept their degree. To begin each ceremony, Senior Vice President of Academic Affairs Kari Brown-Herbst held a moment of silence to contemplate the accomplishments celebrated that day. After the moment of silence was a list of introductions and the national anthem. Faculty member Dave Zwonitzer was the base bearer for the graduation ceremonies, where he was also recognized as the longest-serving faculty member at LCCC. Brown-Herbst noted that this year marks Zwonitzer's 47th year teaching at the community college. Dreamers build After the introductions and a rendition of the National Anthem, sung by Dani Beightol and Taylor McCollum, Schaffer gave a welcome speech to the 2025 graduating class. 'We're here to recognize all that you've done here at LCCC,' Schaffer said. 'Upon your graduation, you will join thousands of LCCC alumni who share your accomplishments. And while you are similar in that fashion, you are unique in a very special way.' The power of dreams was the foundation of Schaffer's oration. He asked each of the sitting grads to picture a rancher on the high plains in Wyoming whose work established a multi-generational homestead. Or a woman from Mexico who immigrated to America for a chance at a better life. Or a man who escaped from Nazi Germany and devoted his life to teaching. Or a young Nigerian woman, who grew up in a place where access to health care and electricity is limited, but studied by candlelight to earn her medical degree. Or Thomas Jefferson, one of America's Founding Fathers, who wrote in the Declaration of Independence 'that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.' 'That dream launched a nation in perfect hope. It was, and still is, striving toward that idea,' Schaffer said. 'Five very different people — a rancher, an immigrant, a refugee of war, an international student, a Founding Father — all tied together by a belief that tomorrow could be better than today.' Hope for change is good, but not enough by itself, Schaffer said. Dreams are visions that demand 'clarity, direction and the courage to act.' 'Dream of stronger communities, of meaningful work, of lives with purpose,' Schaffer said. 'Dream not just of what you can take from the world, but what you can give back. And then act.' Persevere Student Government Association President Caius Krupp delivered the commencement address during the 9 a.m. graduation ceremony. Krupp reminded his peers that challenges are inevitable, but a little perseverance goes a long way. He began his college journey at a four-year institution, but quickly saw that he'd underestimated the level of homesickness and difficulty of classes he would face. When Krupp learned his father was sick, he returned home after the end of the semester. 'I started taking classes here as a promise to my mother that I would be the first one in our family to graduate,' Krupp said. But when he lost his father that semester, Krupp thought he lost any chances of graduating. An instructor pulled him aside after Krupp missed a month's worth of classes to ask what the problem was. 'It made me double down and realize what an opportunity this college is,' Krupp said. 'I tell you this story not to make you pity me, but to show you what Laramie County Community College has let me do, and hopefully has let many of you do.' He asked the graduates to remember their own challenges and how they've overcome them. Many of the college grads were in school during the pandemic. High schoolers missed out on proms and a traditional graduation, classes were online and some lost loved ones. This generation of students had to relearn how to navigate society and what it means to socialize when the world finally emerged from lockdown. 'For some of us, this is just the start of a broader education. ... For others, this is the start of a new career,' Krupp said. 'I want you all to remember … your ability to persevere through the challenges you face and the support of all those wonderful people along the way.'
Time of India
17-05-2025
- Time of India
B N College bomb blast: Main accused, another student held
Patna: Two youths, including the main accused in the bomb blast incident on B N College campus in Patna, which took the life of a student, were arrested from Gaya district on Saturday morning. The main accused was identified as Deepak Kumar from Sanda village in Gaya and a former student of the College of Commerce, Arts and Sciences, Patna. Confirming the arrest, Patna Town DSP Diksha told this reporter that Deepak, who hurled the 'sutli' bomb on B N College campus on May 13 during the exams, was arrested from his native Sanda village on Saturday. "The other arrested accused, identified as Shubhankar, is a second-year BA English (Hons) student of B N College. He was arrested from Jehanabad district on Saturday morning," she said. The DSP said the police are conducting raids to arrest the other four to five students accused in this case. "We are also identifying the people who supplied the bomb or explosive items to the accused," Diksha said. On May 13, a dispute broke out between two groups of students at B N College while the students were taking the CIA (Certified Internal Auditor) exam. After a heated argument and fight, the accused Deepak allegedly hurled two bombs, which created chaos in the college. He was also seen in the viral video of the incident. One bomb fell on the head of a student Sujit Kumar Pandey , a resident of Rohtas district. The incident occurred as soon as he came out of the exam hall. He suffered serious injuries and he died later during treatment. Sujit was a history student at BN College. The police are also raiding the hostels of PU to arrest the other accused involved in the clash. In this sequence, two former students were arrested from B N College hostels on Friday evening. They were identified as Chandan Kumar and Madhu, both residents of Jehanabad. Patna: Two youths, including the main accused in the bomb blast incident on B N College campus in Patna, which took the life of a student, were arrested from Gaya district on Saturday morning. The main accused was identified as Deepak Kumar from Sanda village in Gaya and a former student of the College of Commerce, Arts and Sciences, Patna. Confirming the arrest, Patna Town DSP Diksha told this reporter that Deepak, who hurled the 'sutli' bomb on B N College campus on May 13 during the exams, was arrested from his native Sanda village on Saturday. "The other arrested accused, identified as Shubhankar, is a second-year BA English (Hons) student of B N College. He was arrested from Jehanabad district on Saturday morning," she said. The DSP said the police are conducting raids to arrest the other four to five students accused in this case. "We are also identifying the people who supplied the bomb or explosive items to the accused," Diksha said. On May 13, a dispute broke out between two groups of students at B N College while the students were taking the CIA (Certified Internal Auditor) exam. After a heated argument and fight, the accused Deepak allegedly hurled two bombs, which created chaos in the college. He was also seen in the viral video of the incident. One bomb fell on the head of a student Sujit Kumar Pandey, a resident of Rohtas district. The incident occurred as soon as he came out of the exam hall. He suffered serious injuries and he died later during treatment. Sujit was a history student at BN College. The police are also raiding the hostels of PU to arrest the other accused involved in the clash. In this sequence, two former students were arrested from B N College hostels on Friday evening. They were identified as Chandan Kumar and Madhu, both residents of Jehanabad.
