How was the incarnation an act of solidarity?

In Christian theology, the incarnation is when God came to earth in human form, as a human infant. God was born as Jesus, the son of Mary. Although made of the "same substance" as God, not a "creature" like other humans, Jesus did at the same time become a real human person who was born and who grew, lived, suffered, and died before being resurrected.
The incarnation was an act of solidarity because it brought together God and human beings. They were united in and through the body of Jesus Christ because Jesus was both wholly human and wholly divine. Jesus, according to Christian theology, models for humans how to be divine in our human form. We can do this by believing in Jesus, which means willingly following in his footsteps by acting with love, joy, peace, compassion, forgiveness, and mercy. This behavior makes us fully human/humane, which, in turn, makes us divine and grants us eternal life. We don't have to do this perfectly because God's grace saves us. However, the idea is that Christ-like behavior reflects the divine.
The incarnation also led to the trinity, which can be understood as the three faces of the one God: God the father (the creator, who is all-mighty and all-knowing), God the son (Jesus Christ, God in human form) and the Holy Spirit, the invisible spirit of God poured on the earth (Jesus called this spirit the Counselor in John 15:26). These three facets of God exist in solidarity in what is called the perichoresis, the dance or relationship of three equal parts.

Respond in a complete paragraph to the following questions: 1) Write a few sentences from the point of view of Fortunato or of the listener. 2) Why does Poe use the first-person point of view in "The Cask of Amontillado"?

1) Write a few sentences from the point of view of Fortunato or of the listener.
From the listener's perspective, Montresor's narrative is engaging and disturbing at once. Montresor begins by giving his macabre confession about the murder of Fortunato. According to Montresor, Fortunato wounded him in "a thousand" ways, and Montresor is justified in seeking revenge. However, from the listener's perspective, it is clear that Fortunato may not be the most reliable narrator. The listener is drawn into the increasing suspense of the story as Montresor explains his intention to kill Fortunato in such a way that he will be aware of the fact that his suffering is an act of revenge.
2) Why does Poe use the first-person point of view in "The Cask of Amontillado?"
"The Cask of Amontillado" is told from Montresor's perspective in order to create a heightened sense of suspense that builds throughout the story. Because the story is being told by Montresor, his recollection of events is often thrown into question. This leaves the reader to wonder whether any of Montresor's claims of vengeance are true or whether he is simply mad. The central event of the story, or Fortunato's murder, would be less jarring if it was told from the victim's perspective. The first-person perspective allows the narrator to build up to the murder with his own remembrances, preparations, and ponderings on his motivations. The true horror of the story is encapsulated in the rapture in which Montresor lures his victim to his death and relishes his torment.

Do you think the officer is at first surprised to see the stranger at the doorway? Give reason for your answer.

It is very likely that the officer wasn't surprised to see the stranger at the doorway.
The text tells us why. If we refer to Jimmy's letter at the end of the story, we will understand why he may not have been surprised to see Bob (the stranger).
In the letter, Jimmy says that he was at the meeting place on time. Then, he says something very interesting: "I saw the face of the man wanted by Chicago cops." Being a police officer, Jimmy is privy to information about wanted criminals. So, despite the space of twenty years, Jimmy still recognized Bob.
Most importantly, Jimmy and Bob made a pact twenty years ago. So, Jimmy was likely not surprised to see Bob waiting at the doorway of the shop. The text also tells us that Bob wanted to prove he could find success in the West. Once he did, Bob would have returned to New York City to tell Jimmy about it.

I hope Jimmy has done half as well. He was a slow mover. I’ve had to fight for my success. In New York a man doesn’t change much. In the West you learn how to fight for what you get.

So, Jimmy was likely not surprised to see Bob waiting in the doorway of a shop. First, both men made a pact twenty years ago. Second, Jimmy knew that Bob would return to tell him about his success.

Joyce Carol Oates's “The Lady with the Pet Dog” is a modern American retelling of a classic Russian story, “The Lady with the Little Dog,” by Anton Chekhov. Which of the two stories is the better story?

While readers of modern literature may enjoy Oates's short story because of its stylistic approach (which is more in vogue with its use of common, ordinary characters and the vernacular and the stylish ambiguities of post-modern literature, along with the more feminist slant), the story written by the consummate craftsman, Anton Chekhov, is arguably stylistically superior. That this style is worthy of merit to modern readers is proven by the success of the modern author Raymond Carver, who has long admired and imitated Chekhov's economical style.
In contrast to the literary reflexivity--Oates recounts at length the introspection of her female character--Chekhov keeps his narrative to what one review calls "a concise evocation of the complexity of an intimate relationship." He uses minor details to support emotional states rather than describing the state in a conventional manner. Further, Chekhov's descriptions of nature reflect a character's emotions. For instance, in the first section of the story, after Gurov and Anna Sergeyevna dine in Yalta, they walk and talk to each other, and their conversation is composed of remarks about nature that reflect their feelings:

...the water was of a soft warm lilac hue, and there was a golden streak from the moon upon it. They talked of how sultry it was after a hot day.

Another subtlety of Chekhov's story is his use of impersonal constructions that suggest the subjectivity of the perceptions of the characters. For example, such phrases as "it seemed" and "it appeared" preface what Anna and Gurov perceive. Clearly, there is an artistry to Chekhov's creation of memorable settings that contributes greatly to creating mood. For instance, while the two lovers are in Oreanda, Chekhov writes,

Sitting beside a young woman who in the dawn seemed so lovely, soothed and spellbound in these magical surroundings--the sea, mountains, clouds, the open sky--Gurov thought how in reality everything is beautiful in this world when one reflects....

Chekhov's switching to the first person at times in the narrative, such as in this passage, also serves to place emphasis upon the genuine affection of the lovers. Interestingly, Chekhov's signature "zero ending" is not unlike the ending written by Joyce Carol Oates; they both suggest new beginnings, although Oates's seems, perhaps, more optimistic. 
In summation, the stylistic devices of Chekhov are more definitive and, for this reason, some readers may prefer it to the story of Oates. 

How interconnected were societies before 1491?

I am assuming you are referring to Pre-Columbian societies as discussed in Charles C. Mann's book 1491. These early American societies were actually quite connected. The Aztecs controlled a great deal of central Mexico through either conquest or demanding tribute. Trade goods such as conch shells have been found in Mississippian burial mounds. Feathers from tropical birds have been found in archaeological digs in the Northeast. Even without the aid of horses, early Americans still explored their surroundings and sought out trade goods. Either through trade or diplomacy, many tribes had at least some knowledge that other cultures existed. This explains why disease killed off millions of Native Americans before they even had contact with Europeans—the trade networks which had existed for years before 1491 served to carry disease vectors across the continent when the Europeans arrived.

Why does the narrator compare Della and Jim to the Magi in "The Gift of the Magi"?

The Magi referenced in O. Henry's short story are the three Wise Men who brought gifts of frankincense, gold, and myrrh to the infant Jesus in the Biblical tale; this was a risky gesture, as it could have resulted in punishment by King Herod. Their travel and actions involved sacrifice and the act of selfless giving.  
Thus the narrator of this story compares Della and Jim to the Magi out of respect for their own personal sacrifices. Having no money to purchase each other Christmas gifts, Della had cut off her greatest treasure--her long, beautiful hair--in order to afford a chain for Jim's watch, and Jim had sold his most valued possession--the aforementioned watch--to buy tortoiseshell combs to adorn Della's hair. Much like the Magi honored Christ by falling before him with offerings of love, Della and Jim have done the same by showing no concern for their own desires or interests. They are focused only on the act of spreading love to each other. 

Della and Jim are compared to the Magi because, like the original three kings, this young woman and young man have sacrificed valuable and precious possessions of their own and given them willingly. All their acts are made from pure love and adoration.
O. Henry injects his authorial comment that Della and Jim "are the Magi" at the conclusion of the story after noting that

...two foolish children in a flat...most unwisely sacrificed for each other the greatest treasures of their house.

At this point O. Henry draws parallels between the three wise men and the young Dillinghams as they all have unselfishly given away their most precious gifts. And yet, the author declares that the young couple are the wisest of them because they truly understand the meaning of love that asks for nothing in return. Indeed, they are "the Magi."  

Single Variable Calculus, Chapter 7, 7.7, Section 7.7, Problem 16

Show that $\displaystyle \cos h 2x = \cos h^2 x + \sin h^2 x$

Solving for the left-hand side of the equation

Using Hyperbolic Function


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

\cos hx =& \frac{e^x + e^{-x}}{2}
\\
\\
\cos h 2 x =& \frac{e^{2x} + e^{-2x}}{2}
\\
\\
\cos h 2 x =& \frac{e^x e^x + e^{-x} e^{-x}}{2}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


Using Hyperbolic Identities


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

& \cos hx + \sin hx = e^x \text{ and } \cos hx - \sin hx = e^{-x}
\\
\\
& \cos h 2 x = \frac{(\cos hx + \sin hx)(\cos hx + \sin hx) + (\cos hx - \sin hx)(\cos hx - \sin hx)}{2}
\\
\\
& \cos h 2 x = \frac{(\cos hx + \sin hx)^2 + (\cos hx - \sin hx)^2}{2}
\\
\\
& \cos h 2 x = \frac{\cos h^2 x + \cancel{2 \cos hx \sin hx} + \sin h^2 x + \cos h^2 x - \cancel{2 \cos hx \sin hx} + \sin h^2 x}{2}
\\
\\
& \cos h 2 x = \frac{2 \cos h^2 x + 2 \sin h^2 x}{2}
\\
\\
& \cos h 2 x = \frac{\cancel{2} (\cos h^2 x + \sin h^2 x)}{\cancel{2}}
\\
\\
& \cos h 2 x = \cos h^2 x + \sin h^2 x



\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$

How does Dante use contrapasso in Canto V of Inferno to address the sin of lust?

Contrapasso is one of the rules by which Dante chose to design his version of Hell in his Divine Comedy. Accordingly, each sinner in each circle of Hell is tormented by a punishment that mirrors the sin he or she committed when alive on earth.
The sin of lust is by definition a strong or passionate (usually sexual) desire for something or someone. The connotations thereof are typically that the person ("sinner") in question is swept off his or her feet by, or simply overcome by depth of feeling and/or desire for, the object in question, so much so that rationality and common sense have been all but abandoned or ignored in the single-minded pursuit of the object of his or her lust.
Therefore, in Canto V of Dante's rendition of Hell in Inferno, the spirits of the lustful, "who reason subjugate[d] to appetite," are violently thrown about by ceaseless winds, indeed described as an "infernal hurricane that never rests" and "hither, thither, downward, upward, drives them." They who in life allowed themselves to be overwhelmed by their emotions and desires for the objects of their lust will be forever tormented by being endlessly whipped and whirled through the air, at the mercy of powerful winds against which they have neither recourse nor respite. There is the idea of contrapasso illustrated: the punishment in death mirrors or closely resembles the crime committed in life.
https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/lust

Did both Tom and Father Green abuse Skippy?

Interesting question! If we follow the story, both Father Green (the French teacher) and Tom Roche (the swim coach) did abuse Skippy, but in different ways. The former abused his authority over Skippy by humiliating the young boy in class. As for Tom Roche, the story later reveals that he sexually abused Skippy after the latter passed out.
In the story, Father Green actually harbors pedophiliac tendencies. He finds himself developing feelings of attraction for Skippy, but he doesn't act on them. Instead, he is routinely plagued by feelings of extreme guilt from his days in Africa, when he did sexually abuse boys. Because of his pedophiliac intentions towards Skippy, Father Green uses explicitly sexual banter to toy with the young boy in class. The priest's unfounded allegations about Skippy's misconduct, tinged with salacious implications, cause Skippy to throw up in class.
Later, we learn about Tom Roche's confession to Howard. Accordingly, Tom admitted to his colleague that he had sexually molested Skippy after giving him some painkillers. Apparently, Skippy had complained of pain when he came in to see his coach. The painkillers that Tom gave him, however, knocked Skippy out. After Skippy passed out, Tom had his way with the young man. The next day, Tom Roche gave Skippy another pill and carried on as normal, banking on the fact that Skippy would not remember what happened.
So, the two men did abuse Skippy, but in different ways.

“Nothing is stronger than me”, Violet declares by the play’s end. In what ways is she right? In what ways is she wrong? How does Violet conceive of strength? How does Barbara? Ivy? Karen? Compare and contrast the different generations in the play. How do the eras in which the characters were raised affect their view of the world? Consider what other influences might engender their perspective. What universal truths about families does the play embody? To what degree is the Weston family representative of the American society in the 21st century?

August: Osage County is a Pulitzer Prize-winning dark comic play by Tracy Letts that takes place inside the Weston family home in Oklahoma. The mother of the Weston family, Violet, says toward the end of the play, “Nothing is stronger than me.” Violet’s conception of strength makes these words true in some ways. When the extended family swoops into the Weston home after Violet’s husband Beverly’s mysterious disappearance, she does not seem to want or especially need their comfort or support. As a child of poverty, neglect, and abuse, Violet carries a will to endure that can be seen as strength. However, her conception of strength is tied up with aggression and the desire to lash out against her family as she psychologically terrorizes them throughout the play. However, she can be seen as weak in her dependence on cigarettes that has led to mouth cancer and prescription drugs that render her often incoherent and hysterical. Barbara’s conception of strength is tied to control, evident in her desire to try to save her marriage and hold together her unraveling extended family. Ivy’s sense of strength is also related to control, demonstrated in her desire to maintain secrecy over her affair with “Little” Charles, who she believes to be her cousin but is actually her half brother. Karen’s sense of strength also involves control and how she deludes herself into believing in her own happy ending with her “perfect” fiancé.
The different generations in the play often conflict but reveal similarities. The older sisters Violet and Mattie Fae frequently criticize the younger generations. However, the younger family members all show indications of past, present, and future emotional trauma at the hands of their parents. Both the younger and older generations self-medicate in response to emotional and psychological issues—through cigarettes, alcohol, prescription drugs, marijuana, and sexual misbehavior. Ironically, it is through these methods of self-medication that family members of different generations often bond. For example, Johnna allows Jean to smoke pot in her room, and family conversations are almost always accompanied by alcohol.      
The Weston family depicts an extreme portrait of universal truths about families and may be seen as a hyperbolic representation of American society in the 21st century. A major theme this play explores is secrecy. Nearly every family member in this bleak play holds a secret about themselves or someone else. Often, secrets are used as weapons and are revealed to inflict pain. Another major theme is substance abuse, the impulse to numb or ignore emotional or psychological pain rather than confront or heal it. The play also explores the issue of sexual misconduct and how it can have long-lasting repercussions across generations. Another major theme is death and blame as the family tries to make sense of Beverly’s mysterious suicide. While most families will deal with these issues at some point, the Weston family confronts them all in an emotional hurricane that leaves them torn apart.

How does the description of the abbey in the second paragraph of "The Masque of the Red Death" contribute to the meaning of the text?

In the second paragraph of the story, Poe gives us a vivid description of the castellated abbey in which Prince Prospero and the other nobles hide from the devastating plague that stalks the land.

A strong and lofty wall girdled it in. This wall had gates of iron. The courtiers, having entered, brought furnaces and massy hammers and welded the bolts. They resolved to leave means neither of ingress or egress to the sudden impulses of despair or of frenzy from within.

The abbey is a pretty solid structure designed to keep out the raging pestilence. But it is also constructed to make absolutely certain that no one can escape. Right from the outset, Poe sets the tone of what is to follow. The abbey is not really a place of safety; it is a dark prison in which Prince Prospero and his guests are to be trapped.

The external world could take care of itself. In the meantime it was folly to grieve, or to think. The prince had provided all the appliances of pleasure.

The contemptuous attitude of the nobility towards the people is laid bare. To hell with the outside world, we're perfectly safe inside here. Forget about the appalling death and suffering outside; let's just entertain and enjoy ourselves.
But as the abbey has been described, it's far from being a pleasure palace. Not only is it a prison, it's also a tomb. Prince Prospero and his effete aristocrat friends can try to put off death for only so long. And when the end finally comes they are in the right place for it.

Why is the island called "Ship-Trap Island"? What mean, tricky thing does Zaroff do to ensure ships sink so that he can round up the survivors?

At the beginning of the story, Whitney and Rainsford are standing on the deck of a ship.  It is nighttime.  Whitney points out into the darkness and tells Rainsford that there is indeed an island in the darkness.  Whitney further explains that sailors have a "curious dread" of the island, and the island also happens to be named "Ship-Trap Island."  

"The old charts call it Ship-Trap Island,"' Whitney replied." A suggestive name, isn't it? Sailors have a curious dread of the place. I don't know why."

After falling overboard, Rainsford is forced to swim toward the island.  On the island, Rainsford meets Zaroff, and Zaroff explains why the island has been appropriately named.  
Zaroff's island has electricity on it.  Additionally, Zaroff has placed electrical channel markers out in the island's waters.  The reality is that the channel markers do not actually indicate a real channel.  Zaroff has placed the markers to guide ships into the shallow waters around the island.  Ships mistakenly think there is a channel and run themselves aground.  

"Watch! Out there!" exclaimed the general, pointing into the night. Rainsford's eyes saw only blackness, and then, as the general pressed a button, far out to sea Rainsford saw the flash of lights.
The general chuckled. "They indicate a channel," he said, "where there's none; giant rocks with razor edges crouch like a sea monster with wide-open jaws. They can crush a ship as easily as I crush this nut." He dropped a walnut on the hardwood floor and brought his heel grinding down on it. "Oh, yes," he said, casually, as if in answer to a question, "I have electricity. We try to be civilized here."

The ships are trapped or destroyed, and the sailors are forced onto the island. They are lured to Zaroff's estate and then captured by Zaroff and Ivan.    

Orwell writes that he had made up his mind not to shoot… what changed his mind?

The British police officer stationed in Lower Burma begins the story by commenting on his difficult authoritative position working for the imperialist regime he despises. Despite the British officer's negative feelings towards Britain's foreign policy, he must carry out his orders and deal with the difficult oppressed Burmese natives.
When the officer is initially called to handle a situation involving a loose elephant that is terrorizing the village, he does not plan on killing the animal. As the officer begins searching for the elephant, a crowd of Burmese natives begins to follow him. After witnessing the destruction caused by the elephant, the officer finds the beast peacefully eating grass on the outskirts of town. The officer says,

I had no intention of shooting the elephant—I had merely sent for the rifle to defend myself if necessary—and it is always unnerving to have a crowd following you (Orwell, 2).

However, the crowd size dramatically increases, and the Burmese natives expect the officer to shoot the elephant. The officer explains the peer pressure he feels as he stands with his rifle facing the tranquil elephant. The officer mentions,

And suddenly I realized that I should have to shoot the elephant after all. The people expected it of me and I had got to do it; I could feel their two thousand wills pressing me forward, irresistibly. And it was at this moment, as I stood there with the rifle in my hands, that I first grasped the hollowness, the futility of the white man's dominion in the East (Orwell, 3).

After the officer kills the elephant against his will, he explains the reason why he shot the beast by saying,

I often wondered whether any of the others grasped that I had done it solely to avoid looking a fool (Orwell, 4).

Orwell's insightful piece illustrates the adverse effects of colonialism on those involved, including the oppressors, who are expected to behave as resolute, callous, and authoritative individuals at all times. Overall, the British police officer kills the peaceful elephant against his will due to the peer pressure to act as an authoritative, firm extension of Britain's imperialist regime.

Why doesn't Dexter marry Judy Jones or Irene Sheerer?

Dexter has already been in love with the beautiful and mercurial Judy Jones when he dates Irene Scheerer. He is very close to becoming engaged to Irene—not because he truly loves her, but because he could have a safe and solid marriage to her and become part of her more cultured and elite world. However, when Judy Jones, whom he has always loved in a fitful way, returns, he throws over Irene and decides not to marry her.
In the end, he and Judy date again for only a month before Judy leaves him. He would like to marry her, but she is not interested in marrying him. He knows that he will love her forever, but she marries another man who is cruel to her. Dexter does not marry anyone, and he is upset about his childhood dreams and misconceptions when he gets older.

Perhaps the simplest answer to the question is this: Dexter did not know how to love either of them. Throughout the story, it seems that Dexter is as much in love with the idea of what constitutes romantic love as he is with the belief that to love someone is to possess them. By doing both of the aforementioned, Dexter is never able to see either Judy or Irene as a fully-fledged human being. Dexter idolizes Judy to the point of objectification: she is one of the “glittering things” he longs to possess. Although he believes that he loves her, he realizes that she is beyond his grasp. In desperation, he turns to Irene and in doing so, objectifies her, too. One could think of the poorer and plainer, but more steadfast Irene as his runner-up or rebound relationship choice. In fact, one of Dexter’s reasons for pursuing Irene was to make Judy jealous. Acting on his obsession with Judy not only shattered any hope of happiness he might have had with Irene but also completely alienated him from her, as well as her family.

Why do we study history?

There are multiple reasons to study history, just like any other subject.
One main reason is to understand the path that different people or nations took to get to where they are now. There have been many major changes in nations over the years (i.e. slavery, voting rights, state and country borders) that we would not know about without history. It is important to see where everyone and everything started to see how everything has changed and what progress has been made.
Another important reason is to help understand the present and the future. We can look at history to better guess what to expect. We can look at the evolution of racial tensions and women's rights to better guess where gay rights could go in different countries. We can also study the impact of previous wars and depressions to predict where current or future ones will go. This helps us to find solutions and resolutions better.

“That men do not learn very much from the lessons of history is the most important of all the lessons that history has to teach,” Aldous Huxley wrote. Perhaps first and foremost, we study history to understand what our species has attempted so far, what has worked, and what has not worked. Our written history can be seen as an invaluable record of countless experiments our species has conducted thus far, as well as the results of those experiments. This record allows us to analyze massive tragedies—e.g. the atrocities committed under Stalin in the Soviet Union, or those committed under Pol Pot in Cambodia—in order to avoid recreating the conditions that led to those tragedies. It also enables us to analyze monumental successes, such as the global decline in violence in the last few millennia (as outlined in Stephen Pinker's The Better Angels of Our Nature), in order to perpetuate or replicate those successes as we progress into the future. 
People do, however, study history for a wide array of reasons. For many the subject is inherently fascinating—a kind of time travel. For others, history itself is seen as akin to an irreplaceable artifact that must be preserved and remembered for its cultural and humanistic value. For other still, studying history is a practical method of learning the strategies that have allowed individuals to succeed and thrive in the world. 
In sum, history is quite literally the study of where we come from—of what it has meant to be a human being in this world thus far. It is one of our most useful lenses for understanding what we are, where we have been, and where, perhaps, we ought to go.

There are many different reasons to study history.  The first reason is that we study our past to learn more about our future.  While each situation in history in unique, by studying the past we can learn more about why an event happened.  Leaders can learn lessons from history—after the Great Depression, government became more active in managing the economy.  This is an example of learning from history.  There was also some news censorship in the early days of the Iraq War after the extensive news coverage of the Vietnam conflict made the war unpopular with the American people—this is another example of a lesson taken from history.  
History can also provide inspiration.  One can look at leaders and emulate some of their characteristics.  National histories can also inspire a people in times of trouble and provide a source of nationalistic pride.  
Finally, the study of history can allow the growth of one's writing and analytical skills.  Historians often write a great deal and they are mindful of their audience.  Historians also look for reason why events happened.  Historians gather evidence and form conclusions; no matter what someone does in life, this is a valuable skill.  

Calculus of a Single Variable, Chapter 2, 2.2, Section 2.2, Problem 55

Eliminate the radical by rewriting it as a fraction.
The function becomes:
f(x) = 2/ (x^3)^(1/4) = 2/x^(3/4) = 2x^(-3/4)
Take the derivative by using the power rule.
f'(x) = -3/4 (2)(x^(-3/4-1))
f'(x) = -3/2 (x^(-7/4))
f'(x) = -3/(2x^(7/4))
Substitute x=1.
f'(1) = -3/(2(1)^(7/4)) = -3/2
With the slope of the point, and the given point (1,2), use the slope intercept form to find the equation.
y=mx+b
2=(-3/2)(1)+b
2+3/2=b
b=7/2
The equation of the tangent line is:
y= -3/2 x +7/2
Graph both the equation of the tangent line with the original function. They should intersect at (1,2).
See the image attached.

What deal did Columbus make with the Queen and King to receive funding to explore?

Christopher Columbus did not have an easy time convincing monarchs to fund his explorations.  The King of Portugal turned him away after consulting his advisors and the King and Queen of Spain initially turned him away after consulting their advisors.  The advisors were skeptical of Columbus's calculations in the distance to Asia, which is why both Portugal and Spain turned him down initially.
However, unlike Portugal, Spain saw some potential in Columbus's far-fetched proposal.  The advisory committee, while still skeptical, saw that the potential payoff to the Crown for discovering new lands was worth more than the risk of Columbus receiving funding only to fail in his expedition.  As a result, the committee drew up an agreement between Columbus and the Crown, called the "Capitulations of Santa Fe."
In this deal, in exchange for Columbus claiming all newly discovered lands for Spain, he would receive ten percent of revenues from these lands and the ability to buy company stock in any company that invested in these new lands and receive a corresponding percentage of profit.  In addition to monetary gain, Columbus would also receive the title of "Admiral of the Ocean Sea" and be appointed the Viceroy and Governor of the new lands claimed for Spain.

3. At the end of the story, John’s father tells John, “Truth is a hard dear to hunt. If you eat too much truth at once, you may die of the truth. It was not idly [for no good reason] that our fathers forbade the Dead Places.” What do you think his father means by this statement? What advice or warning is he giving to John, the future leader of the tribe?

The quote from John's father is basically telling John to be careful with the truth.  John has learned that the great city that he explored wasn't inhabited by gods.  It was inhabited by normal men and women like himself.  They were powerful and knowledgeable, but they were still ultimately destroyed.  John is so amazed by what he discovered that he wants to tell his people the truth about what he has learned.  John believes that the truth will be a good thing and a good thing only; however, his father tells him that the truth might also be trouble as well.  Food is a good thing, but if you eat too much of it, you can die.  That's what John's father is saying.  The truth is good, but knowing too much can be harmful. That's why the saying "ignorance is bliss" has a lot of truth to it.  John's father is warning John that knowing the truth could be incredibly dangerous for the people.  For generations they have believed in a certain "truth."  John's reveal would destroy all of that, and it could shake their society to its very foundations.  That is a dangerous thing.  
John takes the warning to heart and realizes that his father is correct.  John decides that giving his people the truth is still the right move, but he decides to do it little by little.  That way it doesn't shake things up too much too soon.  

He was right—it is better the truth should come little by little. I have learned that, being a priest. Perhaps, in the old days, they ate knowledge too fast.

Why was the male slave forced to drink rum?

It's a very crude way of preventing the slaves on board the ship from dying. Gardere tells Jessie that he's often seen slaves die through sitting down, with their heads on their knees, and not moving. So according to him, you have to keep the slaves distracted, get them moving, otherwise they could easily die. Forcing them to drink rum is one way of achieving that. Jessie doesn't have the faintest idea of how slaves would die from just sitting down in a certain posture. Gardere doesn't have much of a clue, either, but he swears blind he's seen it happen before with his own eyes. In any case, what this episode shows is that saving the lives of slaves on board ship is not motivated by any humane considerations; it's simply a way of protecting a very valuable cargo.

Why did the English Civil War have little long-term effect on English government? Why, in contrast, was the revolution of 1688 successful?

The English Civil War was a series of conflicts between the Royalists, who supported an absolute monarchy, and the Parliamentarians, who supported Parliament. The war, which lasted from 1642 to 1651, resulted in victory by the Parliamentarians and the execution of King Charles I. However, the Parliamentarian victory had little long-term impact on England because the resulting governmental structures were temporary. The Commonwealth, which ruled from the end of the war to 1660 and made minor reforms, was forcibly dissolved by the institution of the Protectorate. The Protectorate, led by Oliver Cromwell, gave more power to a leader than the Commonwealth had, causing concern that England was moving back to a monarchist system. These concerns were amplified upon Cromwell's death, when his position was immediately assumed by his son, Richard Cromwell. The Commonwealth assumed power again for a year in 1959, but with the 1660 Restoration the British government was quickly restored to a monarchy. Because the monarchy returned within a decade of its dissolution, the impact of the English Civil War was short-term and limited.
The 1688 Revolution had a much greater impact on the structure of England's government. This revolution overthrew King James II and resulted in the creation of a Bill of Rights, which legally promised the end of absolute monarchy. The Bill of Rights allowed for the existence of the monarchy, but greatly curtailed the powers of the monarch relative to Parliament. The impact of this revolution was lasting, as it permanently curtailed the power of monarchs and gave legislative power to Parliament. It resolved centuries of conflict between the relative powers of the Parliament and the crown, where the English Civil War only caused the two to rapidly alternate leadership before ultimately returning to a monarchic system.

Why is DNA important?

DNA, or deoxyribonucleic acid, is important as a genetic code in a living organism.
Humans are not the only creatures with DNA. Plants have DNA, animals have DNA, and even fungi and bacteria have DNA. 
DNA as a molecule is really a code that the cell can read, containing all of the information that governs the body. Cells can read this code to determine the structures the cell will build and destroy, and how long the cell should wait between different actions.
Mutations are really changes in the code of an organism's DNA. When DNA is altered, the cells will change how they are built.
DNA is the most likely originator of viruses, and is used by viruses to replicate.
DNA is especially important in the study of genetics and medicine, as it can be responsible for many ailments.

Factor by completing the square for f(x)= x^2 -4x +9

Express f(x) = x^2 - 4x + 9  as  x^2 - 2*x*2 + 2^2 - 2^2 + 9 = (x - 2)^2 - 4 + 9 = (x - 2)^2 + 5.  We used the formula  (a - b)^2 = a^2 - 2ab + b^2  in the reverse direction.
We see that this function is always positive for real  x,  therefore it cannot be factored using real coefficients.
But it can using complex numbers:  -5 = (i sqrt(5))^2  and
f(x) =(x - 2)^2 + 5 =(x - 2)^2 -(i sqrt(5))^2 = (x - 2 -i sqrt(5))(x - 2 + i sqrt(5)).
Here we used the formula  a^2 - b^2 = (a - b)(a + b).
The answer is impossible for real coefficients and  (x - 2 -i sqrt(5))(x - 2 + i sqrt(5))  for complex coefficients.

First, when we complete the square for a quadratic function of the form f(x)=ax^2+bx+c we get it into the form (x+b/2)^2-(b/2)^2+c and then simplify. To do this we must add and subtract (to not change the equation) factors of (b/2)^2 .
In this case:
(b/2)^2=(-4/2)^2=4
And
b/2=-4/2=-2
Now add and subtract factors of (b/2)^2
x^2 -4x +9+(4-4)
(x^2-4x+4)-4+9
Factor the term in the parenthesis.
(x-2)^2-4+9
This is now in the form (x+b/2)^2-(b/2)^2+c , now simplify.
f(x)=(x-2)^2+5
This form is convenient for reading off the horizontal and vertical shift of the parabola. The vertex is at (2,5) .

2. Record your views about why mental illness takes some people into other worlds 4. What foreshadowing is there of Alicia's increasing mental instability? Why couldn't her younger sister help her? 6. Many readers prefer an entertaining story with a happy end- ing to a story such as "Alicia." What possible value is there in reading a sad story with an unhappy ending? Discuss

Mental illness can take on many forms. In the short story "Alicia," Gabrielle Roy explores the experiences of a family dealing with schizophrenia. Alicia's mental illness has caused her to lose touch with reality. Her family witnesses her doing things, such as hiding in a cupboard or dressing in a white gown and throwing rose petals out the window, which indicate that she is acting from an altered reality. It becomes clear to them that Alicia has gone, in her mind, to another world.
There is foreshadowing of Alicia's developing delusions early in her sister's remembrances of their childhood together. In one instance the author remembers sitting on the ground among the oak trees and telling her sister that when she grows up she "would do fine and beautiful things." Alicia's reaction to the childhood optimism is unusual and unexpected. Alicia becomes visibly saddened, comments that "one says that, and then one never accomplishes anything except paltry things of no account," and begins to cry. Then she scoops up her little sister like a baby and begins to rock her as she laments all the hurt and sadness in the world. This unusual and extreme response is a taste of the mental illness which will later consume her and transport her deep into the "other world."
Eventually, Alicia's family decides to send her to a mental hospital. In one last attempt at drawing her back into reality, Alicia's mother and little sister visit her there. A beautiful moment occurs when Alicia recognizes the voice of her little sister, and "joy floods her face as if it were the sun." Unfortunately, the miracle her parents are hoping for does not last long. With the recognition of her sister, Alicia also comes face to face with the truth of the despair she has caused her family and immediately withdraws to "a far shore," never to return to sanity. She dies a few months later. Obviously, the ending is heartbreaking. The preference of most readers, just like the preference of every family who watches a loved one suffer from mental health issues, is for the miracle cure. We are rooting for Alicia to recognize her family, to hold on to reality, and to fight for wellness and health. However, there is value in a story told realistically. There is value in stories that don't end "happily ever after," because we can identify with the characters. Readers can empathize with the struggle, heartbreak, hope, and ultimate devastation the family experiences.

What did the United States do to unify the nation after the Civil War?

There were multiple parties working toward unity after the Civil War, and their understandings of what unity meant differed widely. President Lincoln worked under a somewhat forgiving plan, hoping to restore the former Confederate states to the Union as if they had never seceded, except as it concerned the freedom of slaves. After Lincoln’s assassination in 1865, the new President, Andrew Johnson, was even more forgiving. Johnson was a former slave owner from Tennessee who used the power of the presidency to attempt to grant southern states the ability to restrict the rights of former slaves. A group of Republicans, however, fought for the equal representation of former slaves and pushed for the eventual passage of the Fourteenth Amendment. These “Radical Republicans” finally overcame the consistent vetoes of President Johnson and nearly had him impeached in 1868.

Is the American Dream real and achievable? To what degree/extent? How can I use these sources to make an argument? The sources are: Wilson - Fences (the movie); Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby; Roosevelt - Fireside Chats; Rawlings - The Hard Path to Citizenship; Ehrenreich - Since When is it a Crime to be Poor; other relevant materials

This is a fairly complex assignment. In your first paragraph, you should set out a discussion of what your paper will be addressing. Perhaps the best issue to talk about is the decline in social mobility and increase in income inequality of the past few decades. Once you make a basic statement that the "American Dream" is less possible for many Americans due to these changes, you should set out what you intend to discuss in the following sections. Issues you might address are:
Definition of American Dream:The phrase was first defined by 1931. Historian James Truslow Adams in his book 1931 volume Epic of America. in the following passage: "The American Dream is that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement." After this definition, you might talk about how these ideals existed before the phrase itself and how they are embodied in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution. You can then trace the degree to which these ideals compare with the historical changes in social inequality and social mobility.
Gatsby: The first main body section of your essay should discuss Gatsby and his self-invention as an embodiment of the American Dream, both its successes (Gatsby does get rich) and failures (he is a criminal; he is not accepted by upper class society). You might look at this in light of the "robber barons" and the brief period of massive creation of wealth and the subsequent collapse into the Great Depression.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt: In his Fireside Chats, Roosevelt was concerned with offering Americans a "New Deal" that promised economic opportunity and home ownership on a wide scale, creating vast public works projects and widespread economic security.
The Hard Path to Citizenship: The United States was originally a country of immigrants who arrived believing in a promise of economic opportunity in a vibrant New World. Rawls argues that immigrants now face a harder path, although the Obama administration had taken steps to ensure that a path to the American Dream would be accessible to "Dreamers," an effort that may well be rolled back by his successor.
Since When is it a Crime to be Poor: In this essay, Ehrenreich argues that our legal system almost seems designed to keep poor people in poverty.
Conclusion: Your conclusion should discuss how this history of the American Dream shows a difference between our ideals and the reality of growing inequality and lack of social mobility.
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/07/america-social-mobility-parents-income/399311/

How could The Catcher in the Rye be considered as a tragedy?

The Catcher in the Rye details a manic three-day period in which Holden Caulfield's life slowly unravels, leading to a mental breakdown and a stay in an institution. The story deals with serious subject matter, including depression, isolation, death of a sibling, and inappropriate teacher advances, and Caulfield's veiled cries for help are likely to invoke pity in readers; these details indicate a work of literature that can certainly be categorized as a tragedy.
Caulfield is a self-conscious, ill-adjusted narcissist who is traumatized by the death of his brother Allie and is incapable of fitting in at the various boarding schools he attends. His narrative displays the confusion and conflict within, and he contradicts himself often by detailing the beauty of life, followed closely by the terrible misery of life. Caulfield expresses disdain for things and people that are phony, yet he himself lives in an alternate reality, distracted and discontent. He looks fondly upon the past and upon his innocent siblings (Allie, who died young, and Phoebe, who is still young), but he finds few other people who meet his high standards and finds little else in life that brings him satisfaction.
Holden Caulfield ultimately desires to escape the depressing aspects of life, discover his true identity, and simply be happy, a search that is in itself a tragedy since one cannot pause and appreciate real beauty while seeking a mythical ideal. His search for identity is realistic, easily resonating with adults of any age, and we can consider his institutionalization after the events in the novel to be the main character's downfall, which aligns perfectly with the tragedy genre.

A tragedy is a type of drama that deals with serious subject matter and presents human suffering in a dignified manner. According to Aristotle, tragedy is an "imitation of an action that is admirable" and "possess[es] magnitude." A tragedy must also induce pity and sadness from the audience, and the objective of Greek tragedies is for audiences to experience catharsis, which is an intense release of emotions. While The Catcher in the Rye does not fit the traditional Greek standards of a tragedy, it does depict Holden Caulfield's tragic downfall as he experiences a mental breakdown.
Holden is a severely depressed, jaded adolescent who feels isolated in the world and will soon be forced to enter adulthood. Holden's journey deals with serious subject matters that include death, suicide, sexual tension, and pedophilia. Holden talks about his brother Allie's death at the tender age of eleven, recalls witnessing James Castle's mangled body after he commits suicide, and has a strange encounter with Mr. Antolini, who seems to be making a pass at Holden while he sleeps. Towards the end of the novel, Holden mentions that he feels as if he will disappear every time he crosses the street, and he even loses consciousness. Holden's story also ends on a rather disappointing note, with Holden being admitted to a mental hospital or sanatorium. Overall, Holden's depressing story deals with serious subject matters and has a tragic ending that corresponds with Holden's mental breakdown.

How did the Enlightenment and Great Awakening impact American thought?

Many of the founders were affected by the ideas of the Enlightenment, including the importance of reason over superstition and a belief in science. Enlightenment ideas, such as the social contract formulated by Locke and others, played a defining role in the founders' drafting of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Many of the founders were also religious and reconciled their religious beliefs with their belief in reason by becoming Deists. The essential idea behind Deism was that a so-called "watchmaker God" had created the world and then had stepped back to let it run on its own. With this belief system, the founders could continue to believe in reason and the idea that the universe was governed by science while still believing in God.
The First Great Awakening (there were several in American history), which took place in the 1730s and 1740s, was an attempt to assert the importance of faith in the context of the growth of Enlightenment ideals. In New England, so-called "New Light" preachers, such as Jonathan Edwards, whipped up audiences with their ecstatic preaching and called for a return to a belief in faith and predestination (the idea that your fate is decided before you are born). As a result, new religious sects such as Methodism (which came from England) took root in the American colonies, and people began to flock to less established, more ecstatic religions. The Puritan church, centered in Boston, lost ground to newer churches along the Connecticut River, which was then the frontier. To some degree, both strains of thought—the Enlightenment and the Great Awakening—are still influential in America, as the belief in reason and science coexists with the desire for a religion based on faith. 

How is cytokinesis different in plants and animals?

In terms of the end result, cytokinesis in plants and animals is the same. The cells that have been undergoing cell division through mitosis are now separated, and each cell is an individual cell with a complete set of DNA; however, cytokinesis is different between plant cells and animal cells. The reason for this is that plant cells have a cell wall in addition to their cell membrane. Animal cells do not have cell walls; therefore, cytokinesis can happen by having the cell membrane begin "pinching" inward. This pinching is called a cleavage furrow and is controlled by the cytoskeleton. The furrow will continue to deepen until it meets the membrane and fuses. At this point, the cell completely divides and forms two daughter cells. A plant cell can't do this pinching action because of the rigid cell wall. In this case a new wall, called a cell plate, is formed inside the cell. It will grow outward until two new cells are formed.
https://sciencing.com/difference-plant-animal-cell-division-5843738.html

sum_(n=0)^oo 3^n/1000 Determine the convergence or divergence of the series.

Recall that infinite series converge to a single finite value S  if the limit of the partial sum S_n as n approaches oo converges to S . We follow it in a formula:
lim_(n-gtoo) S_n=sum_(n=1)^oo a_n = S .
To evaluate the  sum_(n=0)^oo 3^n/1000 , we may express it in a form:
sum_(n=0)^oo 1/1000 * 3^n .
 This resembles form of geometric series with an index shift:  sum_(n=0)^oo a*r^n .
By comparing "1/1000 * 3^n " with  "a*r^n ", we determine the corresponding values: a = 1/1000 and r = 3 .
 The convergence test for the geometric series follows the conditions:
 a) If |r|lt1  or -1 ltrlt 1 then the geometric series converges to sum_(n=0)^oo a*r^n =sum_(n=1)^oo a*r^(n-1)= a/(1-r) .
 b) If |r|gt=1 then the geometric series diverges.
The r=3 from the given infinite series falls within the condition |r|gt=1 since |3|gt=1 . Therefore, we may conclude that sum_(n=0)^oo 3^n/1000  is a divergent series.

How does Robert's desire for a friend affect his relationship with Dr. Frankenstein?

The novel opens with Robert Walton writing to his sister at length about his lack of a friend as he embarks on his voyage. He tells her of his deep desire for friendship. He writes:

I bitterly feel the want of a friend. I have no one near me, gentle yet courageous, possessed of a cultivated as well as of a capacious mind, whose tastes are like my own, to approve or amend my plans. How would such a friend repair the faults of your poor brother!

Robert then writes to Margaret four months later to tell her of the extraordinary occurrence of meeting Victor Frankenstein. Robert finds Victor a "divine wanderer," "wonderful," and a person of "extraordinary merits." Because of their similar class background, education, and sensitivity, Robert considers Victor a kindred spirit. He writes:

Sometimes I have endeavored to discover what quality it is which he possesses that elevates him so immeasurably above any other person I ever knew.

Robert's loneliness and longing for friendship cause him to exalt Victor into more than he is. This encourages him to see the best in Victor and to credit him with more discernment than he actually has. Walton is a very sympathetic audience, prone to liking and accepting Victor, and eager to hear all the details of his story. We know that in Robert's hands, Victor will be shone in a positive light despite his story of ambition and pride.

At the start of Shelley's Frankenstein, we meet Robert Walton through the letters he is writing to his sister. Walton describes his ambitious plan to explore the North Pole. Then, along the way, he and his crew pick up a man who is distraught and near death. The man is Victor Frankenstein, and he proceeds to tell his life story to Walton. We learn through Walton's commentary about Victor that he is sympathetic with Victor's story. His admiration for Victor and his compassion for this shell of a man make Robert Walton less likely to judge Victor's actions and more susceptible to be won over to his side of the story.
As we know, Victor's story is that of his creation of a creature from dead body parts and the subsequent tragedies that action brings upon Victor and his family. Hoping for fame and glory, Victor does not think ahead about the responsibilities he will have for his creation, and he is disgusted when he brings it to life. He abandons the creature to learn how to function in the world as though it is a newborn abandoned by his parents. Later, when the creature makes an articulate appeal to his creator for a companion, Victor hesitates but agrees, then later destroys the creature before bringing it to life. This unleashes the monster's revenge.
When Walton meets Victor, he and the creature are chasing each other around the North Pole in an apparent fight to the death. Walton reflects compassionately on Victor's story and even considers Victor's request that he carry out Victor's revenge against the creature. When the creature shows up and Walton sees the complex emotions involved on his side of the relationship, Walton perhaps becomes sympathetic to the creature. Even though Walton is hesitant at first to criticize Victor in any way, feeling a close kinship to him, he eventually turns back with his crew, electing to preserve its safety at the cost of his own personal ambitions. Apparently, he has learned something from Victor's story. However, his friendship with Victor does make it difficult for Walton to judge Victor outright, despite the feeling most readers have that Victor acts unethically throughout the novel.

Evaluate "The Triumph of Life" in light of the opinion that "Shelley achieves the sublime."

There are various definitions of what constitutes the "sublime" in literature. To answer this question, we can employ a summation of the ideas expressed by writers, such as Edmund Burke in the middle of the eighteenth century and Wordsworth and the other Romantics. The sublime can be viewed as that which raises the soul to a "higher" state through intense emotions such as terror and wonder. It can also be seen as some unattainable state of mind, elevated above and beyond normal human experience.
Shelley's "The Triumph of Life" is similar to other poems of his, such as "The Mask of Anarchy," in which the speaker tells of a dreamlike vision where an allegorical version of reality appears to him. Though he was a freethinker, Shelley's imagery is heavily influenced by the apocalyptic vision of Revelation in the New Testament. In his poem, the description of Nature has something supercharged about it, which is heightened beyond "conventional" beauty. The vision itself, in which multitudes of people are surging forth before a chariot driven by a ghostly figure with multiple faces, is a nightmare of terror and wonder. The speaker imagines figures from the past, such as Rousseau and Napoleon, who presumably had attempted to redeem mankind but were defeated. The scene is grotesque and otherworldly. It fits the definition of the sublime as that which exists in a universe beyond human reach.
A paradox in the literary concept of the sublime is that it consists of things that are exalted or elevated, as its more ordinary definition would suggest, and things which are simultaneously terrible. Shelley's dream vision is all of these. The formal aspects of "The Triumph of Life" support this interpretation. He uses the terza rima of Dante, an arrangement of triplets, as he had done in "Ode to the West Wind." This establishes a conceptual link to the visions of hell, purgatory, and heaven in The Divine Comedy. Shelley's verses consist of long, complicated sentences. The fact that he did not live to finish the poem seems emblematic of its overreaching, superhuman quality. One has only to contrast this poem with the quiet, thoughtful manner of Wordsworth's "The Prelude" to see what makes Shelley unique and what distances him from the earlier generation of the Romantics.

Did Hamlet really go mad or was it pretense? Please provide support from the play to explain why.

The concept of Hamlet's descent into madness is a major theme throughout the play, but there is no definitive answer as to whether he was actually mad or simply giving a convincing performance. Prince Hamlet actively attempts to convince others that he is insane for his own purposes, which makes the matter more difficult to assess as a reader. It is possible that Hamlet believes his madness to be a pretense when it is, in fact, a reality. In this sense, madness is both a theme and a plot device.
Hamlet's Perspective
Throughout the story, Hamlet's ability to distinguish reality from imagination is called into question by himself as well as others. The first significant evidence that Hamlet is mad could also be taken as a supernatural encounter, depending on your perspective. Towards the beginning of the story, Prince Hamlet is visited by the ghost of his father who asks Hamlet to avenge his murder at the hands of his brother, King Claudius. As events in the play unfold, even Hamlet finds himself questioning whether the appearance of his father's ghost could actually have been a hallucination. Hamlet's perspective is also characterized by emotional distress, as exemplified in the following lines of Act I, Scene II:

O, that this too too solid flesh would meltThaw and resolve itself into a dew!Or that the Everlasting had not fix'dHis canon 'gainst self-slaughter! O God! God!How weary, stale, flat and unprofitable,Seem to me all the uses of this world!

In this portion of the text, we learn that Hamlet's psychological distress has led him to contemplate suicide, even though his religious beliefs forbid both suicide and murder. The conflict between Hamlet's feelings and his beliefs could be seen as the force that pushes him deeper into madness. Visceral longings for his flesh to "melt" and "resolve itself into a dew" also suggest some level of instability.
Madness as Illusion
Hamlet uses the concept of illusion to discuss the idea of madness in a unique way. In this context, madness occurs when a character grasps onto illusion rather than accepting reality for what it is. In many cases, both Hamlet and the reader wonder whether he is capable of discerning the difference at all. An in-text example of the contrast between reality and illusion can be found in Act III, Scene IV. In this scene, a contrast is made between the "real" and "seeming" kings of Denmark. Hamlet is surrounded by illusions created by himself as well as his enemies.
Madness as Pretense
Prince Hamlet is so skilled at pretending to be mad that the reader is left to wonder if it is an act, after all. After seeing his father's apparition, the Prince warns his friends that he will display an "antic disposition," which can also be interpreted as a grotesque act or a convincing impersonation of madness. There is some critical debate as to whether Hamlet's act itself was so convincing that he began to live it or whether he was truly mad all along. There is no definitive answer among scholars, and the open-ended nature of the question is likely an intended theme of the play. Hamlet's sanity, like many other elements of the story, is meant to be ambiguous.
Elizabethan Concepts of Madness
When considering whether Hamlet was or wasn't mad, it is important to understand that Elizabethan concepts of madness were different from the modern day understanding of mental health issues. Many of the traits Hamlet exhibits that are intended to convey madness must be seen through the lens of the play's era. For example, Polonius believes Hamlet has gone mad as a result of what he perceives as Ophelia's rejection. This assumption hinges on the Elizabethan belief that lovesickness was a common condition that could result in severe physical and mental illness.

Discuss the particular devices of humor in Davis Sedaris's "Me Talk Pretty One Day."

Sedaris makes use of malapropism, which is the misuse of words to humorous effect. For example, he writes, describing the dialogue among the students learning French, "That is common for me also, but be more strong, you. Much work, and someday you talk pretty." Many of his sentences contain these types of misuses of language, and it is funny to hear the mistakes that he and his fellow students make in French.
In addition, Sedaris makes use of hyperbole, or exaggeration. For example, he writes, "The first Anna hailed from an industrial town outside of Warsaw and had front teeth the size of tombstones." These types of exaggeration amplify the strangeness of Sedaris's classmates and make these characters funnier to the reader.
Sedaris also uses verbal irony, which typically says the opposite of what the author really means. For example, when his teacher tells him, "You exhaust me with your foolishness and reward my efforts with nothing but pain, do you understand me?" he reacts with great joy because he finally comprehends what she is saying in French. The reader expects him to be insulted, but his joy at understanding his teacher's insults in French creates a sense of irony that results in humor.

As the winner of the Thurber Prize for American Humor in 2001, David Sedaris's Me Talk Pretty One Day is widely recognized for its use of humor techniques.
There are four main ways in which Sedaris delivers humor in this book: diffuse disjunction, script opposition, coincidences, and ending with a punch line.
In the seven chapters of Me Talk Pretty One Day, diffuse disjunction is repeatedly used. It can often be categorized as humorous irony, and it serves as a jab line. One such example is within this quote:

When asked "What do we need to learn this for?" any high-school teacher can confidently answer that, regardless of the subject, the knowledge will come in handy once the student hits middle age and starts working crossword puzzles in order to stave off the terrible loneliness.

Sedaris also uses script opposition as a vessel for humor in providing juxtapositions between the expected and the unexpected. This can be seen within the quote,

At the end of a miserable day, instead of grieving my virtual nothing, I can always look at my loaded wastepaper basket and tell myself that if I failed, at least I took a few trees down with me.

Sedaris also more sparingly relies on coincidences and ending chapters and sentences with a punch line. These are usually delivered with irony and best explained as tongue-in-cheek humor.

In Sedaris's essay "Me Talk Pretty One Day," he uses many devices to create humor; here are five to get you started:
In the opening line he ironically describes himself as a "debutante" at the age of forty-one, upon his return to school. Debutantes are typically teen girls, so a forty-one-year-old man thinking of himself in these terms is funny.
Sedaris also has a keen eye for the absurd in his description of the discounted entry fees his student ID will bring him: to "puppet shows and "Festyland," a remote, dubiously-named amusement park that advertises itself with a "cartoon stegosaurus sitting in a canoe and eating what appears to be a ham sandwich."
Sedaris's self-deprecating description of his lack of sophistication contrasted with his fashionable classmates is hilarious: "not unlike Pa Kettle trapped backstage after a fashion show." Pa Kettle is a hillbilly character from a 1950's television show.
The teacher, who is painted as exaggeratedly cruel to her language students, is, according to Sedaris, very hard on them. But he thrives under her despotic rule and using oxymoron to humorous effect, he claims that he came to enjoy "bathing in the subtle beauty of each new curse and insult."
Sedaris uses hyperbole to comic effect in describing one of two women named Anna in his class; she "had front teeth the size of tombstones."

Do you think leadership is more important or less important in today’s flatter management structures?

I do not think that one can make a blanket claim about all types of leadership in all industries or even assume that the management structures in all companies in the world are necessarily flatter than they were at some unspecified period in the past.
A good or bad CEO can either harm or hinder a business. A company founded on innovation or disruption requires leaders with innovative ideas and the willingness and power to pursue unconventional ideas. Amazon, for example, could not have achieved it current position without a leader willing to forego short term profitability to build market share. On the other hand, powerful executives who command huge salaries and sacrifice R&D investment for short term profits to boost their own stock options can harm a company. Both of these are equally true in more and less flat management structures.
On the level of middle management, flatter management structures mean more people reporting to a single manager, and thus the effects of bad and good management practices will impact more people. However, part of the philosophy behind flatter management structures is empowering workers and increasing collaborative rather than top-down management. Thus a good manager in such an environment should be less concerned with "leadership" and more concerned with being a facilitator. 
 

What is hydrocarbon combustion?

Hydrocarbon combustion involves the burning of a hydrocarbon compound. Hydrocarbon compounds contain only the elements hydrogen and carbon. In order for combustion to take place, oxygen must be present. Since oxygen is a diatomic element in nature and is never found as a single atom, it will be written as O2 in a chemical equation. Hydrocarbon combustion reactions always produce the same two products, CO2 and H2O. Below is an example of this type of reaction.
CH4 + O2 --> CO2 + H2O
The hydrocarbon (CH4) listed in the reaction above is called methane and is a colorless and odorless gas. Methane is the main component found in natural gas, which is a non-renewable energy source. As energy needs around the world increase, methane and other fuels will continue to be used while more research involving renewable methods occurs.
One of the two products produced from a hydrocarbon combustion reactions has created much controversy in the last twenty years. Carbon dioxide is considered a greenhouse gas. Greenhouse gases gather in the atmosphere and act as a blanket around the Earth trapping in heat. These gases cause an overall warming of the planet that may result in changes in water temperature, winds, and seasons.

Definitions of combustion vary somewhat, but when talking about hydrocarbons it is taken to mean a chemical reaction with oxygen that gives off heat and light, i.e. burning something. Combustion requires ignition, or an initial input of energy as heat. Once ignited, the reaction is sustained by the energy released in the reaction.
A hydrocarbon is any chemical compound of carbon and hydrogen. Apart from coal, which is carbon with different levels of contaminants, fossil fuels are hydrocarbons. Methane is the simplest, with the formula CH_4 . Propane is another gaseous hydrocarbon with the chemical formula C_3H_8 . Petroleum as it is extracted from the ground is a mixture of hydrocarbons. The process of refining mostly involves separating these into fractions, which are mixtures of hydrocarbons having certain ranges of properties, such as gasoline, kerosene, diesel, etc. Many of these products are burned as fuel, and the heat energy released is harnessed in different ways.
The products of complete combustion are carbon dioxide and water. A general chemical equation for the combustion of a hydrocarbon is written
C_mH_n + O_2 -> CO_2 + H_2O
Note that this chemical equation is not balanced. The “m” and “n” subscripts indicate that compounds containing different amounts of carbon and hydrogen all combust according to the same pattern.
The carbon dioxide produced in combustion of hydrocarbons is a concern today because it is known to be a “greenhouse gas”—that is, a gas that, in increased concentrations, changes the balance of radiative energy entering and leaving Earth’s atmosphere, causing a net warming of the atmosphere. Methane, which can escape into the atmosphere during extraction of hydrocarbons, is also a greenhouse gas. Concerns about changes in climate caused by atmospheric warming have motivated recent development in energy sources other than hydrocarbon fuels.

What was the impact of the Enlightenment on colonial society in America?

The Enlightenment gave the colonies the philosophical underpinnings to oppose British rule and establish their own country. For example, John Locke's Second Treatise on Government makes many of the same claims as the colonists later used in declaring their independence.
Enlightenment thinkers such as John Locke based human rights on the idea of natural law, which argues that humans have a God-given right to liberty and the pursuit of self interest or happiness. He contended that people give up some of these rights to enter into civil society and gain the protection of the government. However, Locke also stated that humans have an innate right to rebel against and throw off a government that becomes too tyrannous, violating the rights of the populace.
Men such as Thomas Jefferson used this line of thought to justify breaking away from the British to set up an independent nation. For example, The Declaration of Independence borrowed from Enlightenment thinking when it states that governments derive their "just powers from the consent of the governed" and offers a list of grievances which the writers argued showed King George III's "absolute tyranny" over the colonies. Without an Enlightenment sense that they had "natural rights," including a right to reject an unacceptable government, it might have been much harder to justify rebellion against Great Britain.

What unusual qualities does Nunez notice about the villagers's houses?

When Nunez first looks down from the hill at the houses, he thinks that the people that built them must have been "as blind as a bat." They have smeared the walls with plaster of such irregular colors that browns, grays, and other drab colors are all mixed together in an ugly swirl.
Perhaps in light of this, Nunez states that the most noticeable thing about them was the cleanliness of their surroundings. They are organized in "continuous row on either side of a central street of astonishing cleanness." They are, he says, quite unlike "the higgledy-piggledy agglomeration of the mountain villages he knew."
Even more intriguingly, none of the houses have any windows. Their only opening is a small door. When he finally enters a house and the door is closed behind him, it is, apart from a fire at one end, pitch black.

In "The Country of the Blind," Nunez notices that the village houses do not resemble any of the ones he is familiar with in mountain villages.
For example, the village houses are neatly arranged in rows. In turn, the twin, continuous rows are separated by an unusually clean street. Nunez is surprised that the houses are not located in haphazard locations in "higgledy-piggledy agglomeration[s]," as the mountain village homes are. Additionally, the walls of the village houses are also multi-colored, and none of the houses have windows.
Nunez also notices that "parti-colored" plaster appear to have been smeared onto the walls in no particular order. Because of the random way in which plaster has been applied to the walls of the houses, Nunez concludes that a blind man must have worked on the buildings. He is, however, most intrigued by the lack of windows in any of the houses.

What were the effects of the transatlantic slave trade?

The effects of the slave trade were numerous and enduring. They are, arguably, still being felt in our present day. 
The two most important effects to consider are economic and cultural.
The New World, particularly the United States, built its wealth off of slave labor. Around forty-five percent of Africans who were captured on the western coast of the continent were shipped to Brazil. Another forty-five percent went to the British, French, and Spanish colonies in the Caribbean. Only around five percent were sent to the thirteen colonies that would become the United States. The number of slaves would significantly increase during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries due to the practice of "breeding" slaves, to not even mention the impact of rape and concubinage. The remaining five percent of slaves were scattered around Mexico, Central America, and other parts of South America. 
Industrialists and planters reaped vast amounts of wealth off of cash crops, such as sugar, rice, and cotton, due to the ability to obtain free labor. Furthermore, slave labor could be exhausted in ways that would not be tolerated by whites working in indentured servitude. The ability to force someone to work in extreme weather conditions or for exceptionally long hours, out of fear of torture or death, extracted more labor from the individual and, thus, more capital. This capital not only brought wealth to the white planter class in the New World, it also contributed to the wealth of the European nations which held these territories. They used the cash crops to fuel their industries, such as the use of cotton for textile plants. 
Another major effect of the Atlantic slave trade was cultural. Certain instruments, such as the drum, were introduced to the New World. Despite the objection of many slave owners, slaves continued to play the drum in secret and eventually, it became a legitimate and widely accepted musical instrument. The cultural impacts of slavery are myriad, but it had a profound impact on music, particularly the development of spirituals, which led to blues and jazz. These are uniquely American forms that would not have occurred without the descendants of slaves. In South America and the Caribbean, samba and salsa developed from the same influence.

Describe the system of government set up under the Articles of Confederation.

The Revolutionary War, the American colonies needed to coordinate their efforts against Britain. They created an emergency government to raise money for the war effort called The Continental Congress. After the Revolution the colonies were officially independent from Great Britain. They needed to create a system of government to run this new nation. The first system created was known as The Articles of Confederation and was adopted on November 15th, 1777. In its final form, the Articles of Confederation were comprised of a preamble and 13 articles.
The structure of the Articles of Confederation consisted of one branch of government placing Congress responsible for making national laws. The executive and judicial branch did not exist. Each state had one representative vote in Congress and to pass a proposal to become law 9 of 13 states needed to approve. For existing laws all states had to agree to the proposed change.
This loose alliance of states could not collect taxes, had to ask individual states for money, and placed trade regulations in the hands of the state. While the Articles of Confederation established a postal system, a system of weights and measures, federal courts, and consequences for piracy, true power rested with the states. The government under the Articles of Confederation acted as a go-between entity for the states.

The Articles of Confederation arose out of the American colonists' struggle for independence, and this is the historical and political background against which they must be evaluated and understood. The American colonists believed that they were fighting for their inalienable rights against a tyrannical British government that burdened them with ever-increasing taxation without giving them the freedom to run their own affairs. Their negative experiences of dealing with the British inculcated Americans with a profound distrust towards any kind of strong, centralized government.
When it came to establishing a government of their own, it's not surprising that the American colonists deliberately sought to disperse power as much as possible. To that end, the Articles of Confederation ensured that ultimate sovereignty resided with the individual states rather than with a central Federal government. A confederation, by its very nature, is a loose alliance of separate powers voluntarily coming together to pursue common goals. And this seemed like the perfect arrangement for a people tired of being told what to do by a centralized government abroad.
As the framers of the Articles wanted to avoid the re-establishment of tyranny on American soil, they deliberately left the central government weak. Acts of Congress needed the votes of nine out of the thirteen states to pass; members of Congress were prevented from serving for more than three years. It was hoped that these measures would avoid a concentration of power as well as the generation of a self-serving political elite.
Under the Articles of Confederation, the Congress itself was to be elected by the states, with each state sending two delegates, irrespective of size or population. This was to make sure that the larger states would not dominate the smaller ones. Just as the United States was to be independent from Great Britain, so too would each individual state be independent from all the others.
What appeared to the framers of the Articles as the main strengths of the document turned out to be fatal weaknesses: without a central bank, the United States was unable to pay off the enormous debts it had accrued during the Revolutionary War; although the Articles placed restrictions on the states in the conduct of foreign policy, in actual fact, there was no enforcement mechanism in place to stop them from acting independently in relation to foreign states. As domestic disturbances could only be dealt with at the state-wide level, it was impossible for Congress to prevent them from spreading beyond state borders and potentially leading to widespread violent disorder throughout the new nation.

What are some differences between the Shimerdas and Burdens?

There are several key differences between the two main families featured in My Ántonia. The Burdens are the family of Jim Burden, the orphaned boy who's the novel's narrator and protagonist, while the Shimerdas are the family of the titular character, Ántonia. And one important difference to mention (though it doesn't necessarily fit into the following list of cultural differences) is that Josiah and Emmaline Burden are not Jim's parents: they're his grandparents, so they're a generation older than the Shimerdas.
Back to the key differences. The first pertains to nationality and ethnic heritage. The Shimerdas are Bohemian immigrants (and Mr. Shimerda, Ántonia's father, feels very out of place in his new home, which leads to depression), while the Burdens have long been established in their community in Nebraska. 
The second difference is in the disposition or personality type of each family's patriarch. As I mentioned above, Mr. Shimerda falls into a depression due, in part, to the alienation and disorientation he feels as an immigrant. But several passages suggest that he is a depressive character to begin with, moody and prone to feeling sad. Josiah Burden, on the other hand, isn't expressive. He's practical and hardworking, and he doesn't say much.
A similar contrast could be drawn between each family's matriarch. While Mrs. Shimerda is an unhappy sort, especially after her husband's suicide, Emmaline Burden is warm and loving to her grandson, serving a maternal role for Jim.
Another key difference has to do with socioeconomic position. Partly because the Burdens are well-established in Nebraska and partly because Josiah is such a diligent worker and provider, the family is comfortable compared to the Shimerdas. The immigrant family has many children, and Mrs. Shimerda struggles to make ends meet after her depressed husband takes his own life.

To what degree was the Meiji Restoration a revolution?

The Meiji Restoration was revolutionary in many important respects. When the Meiji Emperor came to power, Japan embarked upon a process of modernization that transformed the country beyond recognition. Previously, Japan had been a weak vassal state, riven with internal conflict. Political authority resided with the shōguns, semi-independent feudal warlords. They were constantly fought each other for supremacy, undermining the stability of the Japanese state. This made Japan all too vulnerable to Western manipulation and control.
Emperor Meiji put an end to Japan's subordination by beating the West at its own game. He established a highly centralized, bureaucratic system of government on Western lines; he put in place a new constitution which included an elected parliament; he set about constructing a modern transport and communication infrastructure; the education system was radically overhauled, challenging the old feudal hierarchies by its emphasis on merit and individual achievement; and most importantly of all, Japan under Meiji built a powerful army and navy that would allow the country to assert itself more aggressively in pursuit of its interests.
As a result of all these changes, Japan became a major player in international affairs. It regained full independence in relation to its trade and foreign policy, allowing it to pursue long-held dreams of imperial glory. Japan became militarily powerful, winning two major conflicts, one of which was against a European power, Russia. Though still retaining many of the old traditions, Japan had become, to all intents and purposes, thoroughly Westernized, able to compete with the West on more or less equal terms. If we contrast this with the weak, subservient position of Japan before Meiji ascended the throne, we can see why the emperor's assumption of power was not just a restoration but a revolution.

Who is the main character in The Graveyard Book?

The Graveyard Book, written by Neil Gaiman, begins with a brutal murder. Jack Frost, a villain, kills a husband, wife, and sister, but he is unable to kill the baby of the family. This baby turns out to be the main character of this novel, Nobody "Bod" Owens. While his family is being murdered, Bod leaves his house and wanders to the graveyard.
When Bod arrives in the graveyard, he is saved by Mrs. and Mr. Owens, a ghost couple. With pleas from Bod's newly dead family members, Mr. and Mrs. Owens agree to take care of Bod and promise to protect him from Jack. Bod is given "Freedom of the Graveyard," which means he can move about the graveyard with ease. A downside to this freedom is that he can not be seen by most humans.
Despite not being able to be seen by most humans, Bod does make a few friends during his interesting childhood. One friend is a mysterious man named Silas. Silas is able to leave the graveyard freely and can move between worlds. Bod also meets a little girl named Scarlett Amber Perkins. Her parents believe she has an imaginary friend because they are unable to see Bod.
Bod has many adventures throughout the novel, including being taken prisoner by ghouls, learning new languages, being in several fights, learning to protect his friends, and having to avenge a murder.

The main character of The Graveyard Book, by Neil Gaiman, is Nobody Owens. Nobody, called Bod, is an orphan who escaped the murder of his family. His parents and siblings were killed by "the man Jack," and Bod survived by wandering away and into a graveyard. When he arrived there, a lady ghost protected him and decided that he should live in the graveyard but have the freedom to walk among both living and dead. This lady ghost and her equally spectral husband raise Bod in the graveyard, and he learns many supernatural powers from his ghost companions. Though Bod's childhood is unusual, he makes friends with both the living and the dead, and is well provided for by Silas, who can move among the living with ease. Throughout the course of the book, Bod must confront the man who killed his family as well as the fact that he cannot stay among the dead forever.

Calculus of a Single Variable, Chapter 5, 5.8, Section 5.8, Problem 88

The given problem (dy)/(dx) =1/((x-1)sqrt(-4x^2+8x+1)) is in form of a first order ordinary differential equation. To evaluate this, we may follow the variable separable differential equation: N(y) dy= M(x)dx .
dy=1/((x-1)sqrt(-4x^2+8x+1)) dx
Apply direct integration on both sides:
int dy=int 1/((x-1)sqrt(-4x^2+8x+1)) dx
For the left side, we apply basic integration property: int (dy)=y.
For the right side, we apply several substitutions to simplify it.
Let u =(x-1) then x=u+1 and du=dx . The integral becomes:
int 1/((u)sqrt(-4x^2+8x+1)) dx =int 1/(usqrt(-4(u+1)^2+8(u+1)+1)) du
=int 1/(usqrt(-4(u^2+2u+1)+8u+8+1)) du
=int 1/(usqrt(-4u^2-8u-4+8u+8+1)) du
=int 1/(usqrt(-4u^2+5)) du
Let v = u^2 then dv = 2u du or (dv)/(2u)=du . The integral becomes:
int 1/(usqrt(-4u^2+5)) du=int 1/(usqrt(-4v+5)) *(dv)/(2u)
=int (dv)/(2u^2sqrt(-4v+5))
=int (dv)/(2vsqrt(-4v+5))
Apply the basic integration property: int c*f(x)dx= c int f(x) dx .
int (dv)/(2vsqrt(-4v+5)) =(1/2)int (dv)/(vsqrt(-4v+5))
Let w= sqrt(-4v+5) then v= (5-w^2)/4 and dw=-2/sqrt(-4v+5)dv or
(dw)/(-2)=1/sqrt(-4v+5)dv
The integral becomes:
(1/2)int (dv)/(vsqrt(-4v+5)) =(1/2)int 1/v*(dv)/sqrt(-4v+5)
=(1/2)int 1/((5-w^2)/4)*(dw)/(-2)
=(1/2)int 1*4/(5-w^2)*(dw)/(-2)
=(1/2)int -2/(5-w^2)dw
=(1/2)*-2 int 1/(5-w^2)dw
=(-1) int 1/(5-w^2)dw
Apply basic integration formula for inverse hyperbolic tangent function:
int (du)/(a^2-u^2)=(1/a)arctanh(u/a)+C
Then, with corresponding values as: a^2=5 and u^2=u^2 , we get: a=sqrt(5) and u=w
(-1) int 1/(5-w^2)dw = -1/sqrt(5) arctanh(w/sqrt(5))+C
Recall w=sqrt(-4v+5) and v=u^2 then w =sqrt(-4u^2+5).
Plug-in u=(x-1) on w =sqrt(-4u^2+5) , we get:
w =sqrt(-4(x-1)^2+5)
w=sqrt(-4(x^2-2x+1)+5)
w=sqrt(-4x^2+8x-4+5)
w=sqrt(-4x^2+8x+1)

Plug-in w=sqrt(-4x^2+8x+1) on -1/sqrt(5) arctanh(w/sqrt(5))+C , we get:
int 1/((x-1)sqrt(-4x^2+8x+1)) dx=1/sqrt(5)arctanh(sqrt(-4x^2+8x+1)/sqrt(5))+C
=-1/sqrt(5) arctanh(sqrt(-4x^2+8x+1)/5)+C
Combining the results from both sides, we get the general solution of the differential equation as:
y=-1/sqrt(5) arctanh(sqrt(-4x^2+8x+1)/5)+C

What are Ponyboy’s physical and personality traits?

Ponyboy is a dreamer. It is one of the reasons why he and Cherry get along so well together. He's also an open-minded, critical thinker. This is another reason why he and Cherry get along. She tells Ponyboy that the Greasers and Socs are similar, and she tells him that the Socs have their own problems as well. Ponyboy doesn't dismiss the idea. Instead, he contemplates it and ends up agreeing with her.
Ponyboy is also one of the most respectful of the Greasers. This is why he doesn't talk dirty to Cherry and her friend, and it's why he feels ashamed when another Greaser does talk to them in a disrespectful manner. The other Greasers all recognize these qualities about Ponyboy, and it is why they try to keep him a bit distanced from their violent world. Johnny especially notices these characteristics, and that's why he tells Ponyboy to "stay gold."
As for looks, the opening paragraphs of the book provide readers with a fair amount of detail. He tells his readers that he has light brown, "almost red" hair and greenish-gray eyes. Like other Greasers, Ponyboy keeps his hair long, and he laments having to dye it and cut it. Ponyboy is a sibling of both Darry and Sodapop, and we know that he is a fairly good-looking kid; however, we also know that he isn't as attractive as either of his brothers. Finally, readers are told that he is one of the smaller members of the gang, but this is likely because of his age.

What characteristic of a mongoose makes it hard to frighten one and accounts for the mongoose motto: "Run and find out"?

The primary characteristic of mongooses that makes them hard to frighten and accounts for their motto "Run and find out," is their curious nature. Similar to most mongooses, Rikki-tikki is inherently curious and courageously explores unknown regions, such as the bungalow and its surrounding property, without batting an eye. After being washed from his burrow and family in a severe flood, Rikki-tikki arrives at a British family's bungalow in Colonial India. Rikki-tikki does not waste time exploring the new home and surrounding region, where he discovers two malevolent cobras terrorizing the garden of the family's bungalow. Despite being a young newcomer, Rikki-tikki is not frightened by his new environment or the massive cobras living in the family's garden. Thanks to Rikki-tikki's insatiable curiosity, he is not afraid when he comes face-to-face with Nag and Nagaina. Kipling reveals Rikki-tikki's inherently courageous nature by writing, "...it is impossible for a mongoose to stay frightened for any length of time" (2). Rikki-tikki eventually kills both Nag and Nagaina and restores peace to the British family's bungalow.

The motto stated in the question comes from Rudyard Kipling's short story "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi." The motto perfectly embodies the central character, Rikki-Tikki. "Run and find out" refers to the natural curiosity of a mongoose. The story says it is nearly impossible to frighten a mongoose because they are so consumed with curiosity. That means when a mongoose comes across something that should be terrifying, the mongoose isn't scared, just more. This holds true in Kipling's story. When Nag and Rikki-Tikki first meet, Nag raises himself up and spreads his hood open. The text says Rikki-Tikki was momentarily frightened, but then remembers he used to eat snakes. From that moment his curiosity takes over, and Rikki-tikki begins questioning Nag, not fearing him.  

What are three examples of how the Constitution may be adapted to meet changing conditions?

The Constitution may be adapted through an amendment. Amendments, as delineated in Article V of the Constitution, can be proposed by 2/3 of the Congress or by a 2/3 majority of a convention called by Congress at the request of 2/3 of state legislatures. To be ratified, as 27 amendments have been, the amendment has to be approved by 3/4 of state legislatures or 3/4 of conventions called in states. 
The Supreme Court can also decide to interpret the Constitution in a different way. For example, in the case McCullough v. Maryland (1819), the court ruled that the Congress had the power under the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution (Article I, Section 8) to charter the Second Bank of the United States. 
In addition, the President, through custom and practice, can decide to execute some parts of the Constitution and choose not to execute others (though he or she can't change the Constitution). For example, the Constitution calls for the President to provide the Congress with information about the state of the union from "time to time." Presidents such as Thomas Jefferson delivered written updates to Congress; however, since the Wilson administration, the President has addressed the address to Congress in person. The clause in the Constitution provides the President with some degree of latitude about how he or she chooses to address the Congress, but the custom is now to provide a speech to Congress. 
 

What makes a good fuel?

A good fuel may have one or more of the following characteristics:
High calorific value: it should be able to generate a high amount of heat per unit mass (or volume). That would enable generation of a higher quantity of energy per unit.
Low cost: the fuel should be economical to manufacture or extract. This would ensure that it would be used for more applications and by more people.
Longer shelf life: a good fuel should not degrade over time and hence be amenable to long-term storage.
Easy transport and storage: a good fuel does not require too many precautions or considerations for transport and storage, thereby keeping the costs low.
No or low level of emissions and products: a good fuel will produce no or a very low amount of emissions and products that require disposal. This also means that no harmful emissions or end products should be leftover so that the environment and living beings are not adversely affected.
Controlled combustion: the fuel should be amenable to controlled combustion so that it can be used in the desired manner as per our requirements.
Moderate ignition temperature: the fuel should have a moderate ignition temperature, thus ensuring energy generation at moderate enough temperatures.
Hope this helps.

What are the giants names

There are nine other giants in Giant Country, and though big, they're most definitely not friendly. Unlike the BFG they don't go round gently blowing nice dreams through sleeping children's windows. Instead, they roam around at night looking for human "beans" to eat. They're twice as tall and wide as the BFG, and unlike him they're really nasty, as the BFG tells Sophie:

Giants is all cannybully and murdeful! And they does gobble up human beans!

Just as the BFG—the Big Friendly Giant—has a name that perfectly sums up his character, so too do the other giants. In no particular order, they are:

The Bonecruncher, who "crunches up two whoppsy-whiffling human beans for supper every night!"

The Fleshlumpeater. This one's the worst of all. He certainly has the most disgusting name, that's for sure.
The Bloodbottler.

The Childchewer. A pretty self-explanatory name, really.

The Meatdripper. On second thought, this is the most disgusting name.

The Gizzardgulper. Gizzards are an old-fashioned name for guts or insides. This giant doesn't even have the decency to chew; he just gulps it all down.
The Maidmasher.

The Manhugger. Sounds quite friendly, doesn't he? But this is not someone you'd ever want to get too close to. If this giant hugs you then you'll never get to hug anyone else again.

The Butcher Boy. It's safe to say this hideous, bloodthirsty monster didn't get his delightful nickname by delivering pork chops and sausages to people's doors.

Why doesn't von Gradwitz want witnesses to see what he has planned?

Ulrich von Gradwitz doesn't want any witnesses around when he kills Georg Znaeym. In other words, he aims to kill his rival if he catches him alone. Privately, Ulrich isn't interested in just apprehending his enemy; he means to kill Georg if the opportunity presents itself, and in the event he gets his chance, Ulrich doesn't want to be held accountable for the murder.
This is part of the reason von Gradwitz orders his men to lie in wait at the crest of the hill while he ventures further down the steep slopes. As luck will have it, he does come face to face with Georg. The text tells us both men are not entirely unhappy with this state of affairs. Each man cherishes hate and murder in his heart, and each is ready to "give full play to the passions of a lifetime." As the narrator relates, things don't turn out the way each imagines it will.
An unforeseen catastrophe sees both men pinned down by the branches of an enormous beech tree. The ending of the story is ironic, and the text suggests both men may die together at the hands of wolves.

How does Things Fall Apart function as a counter narrative to imperialism?

Post-colonial is a term for literature affected by Western Imperialism. It explores what stories (narratives) to tell and how to tell them. Achebe's title highlights this notion: Things Fall Apart, taken from Yeats’ “The Second Coming.”
Achebe's narrative works both with and against European literary tradition. The last two lines of Yeats' poem warn: "And what rough beast...Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?" Alluding to Yeats, Achebe offers criticism of imperial rule as too much of a "good" thing; the colonizers believed they were saving a savage people who lacked law and religion. However, Achebe's perspective highlights a counter narrative (the Igbo people DID have cultural values). For example, "It is against our custom, It is an abomination for a man to take his own life. It is an offense against the Earth" (178). Tragically, due to imperial interventions, Okonkwo feels he has lost his identity and reason to live. The "rough beast" (white man) is too much and he hangs himself. Achebe's post-colonial narrative offers an authentic alternative to the traditional imperial story.

Imperialism, put simply, is a policy whereby a country extends its power and influence either by diplomatic means, military intervention or some other stratagem. Things Fall Apart acts as a counter narrative to imperialism in that it exposes the flaws inherent in such a policy.
In the novel, we are introduced to the cultural, religious, legal and economic traditions of the Ibo people. These traditions had become entrenched and were a way of life for them. Members of the tribe unquestionably accepted authority and and everyone knew his place and enjoyed the freedoms and privileges offered by such an existence. In effect, members were happy with what they had and their lives were, although not idyllic, satisfying.
The arrival of the British imperialists gradually eroded the cohesion within Ibo society. They introduced a new religion, new laws and a new government. Once the Ibo were exposed to these new conditions, conflict ensued. The imperialists, through their new laws, dealt out harsh punishments to those who opposed them.
The imperialists' religious doctrines and values were in direct contrast to those practiced by the Ibo, and many Ibo questioned their own belief system and turned to the new church. This created conflict between members of the Ibo since many of them, such as the protagonist Okonkwo, perceived the dangers posed by the imperialist system. He believed that its influence would eventually lead to the destruction of their traditional way of life.
Okonkwo's death is symbolic of the death of Ibo culture. The growth in the imperialists' influence is contrasted by the decay of Ibo culture. Many Ibo began to resent the strictures of their own culture and rebelled against it by adopting the new system of thought. The obvious outcome was that centuries of tradition became nothing. The conventions introduced by the imperialists were harshly enforced and became like a greedy monster swallowing everything in its path until almost nothing was left.
In the end, the novel clearly depicts the destructive nature of imperialism. It is a system of oppression which has no respect for the beliefs and cultures of those upon whom it imposes itself. It disintegrates and eventually destroys traditionally functional societies. Those who become its victims are left with no choice but to adapt, face incarceration and torture, or die. Such is the tragedy of Things Fall Apart.

A block explodes into three pieces of equal mass. Piece A has speed v after the explosion, and pieces B and C have speed 2v . What is the angle between the direction of the piece A and the piece B?

Here we need the conservation of momentum law. I suppose that before the explosion the block was in rest thus its momentum was zero. The law states that after the explosion the total momentum of the pieces is also zero (if we ignore the mass and speed of explosives).
Momentum is a vector quantity and the total momentum is a vector sum. Denote the mass of each piece as m. Then
m vec V_1+m vec V_2+m vec V_3=0,  or  vec V_1+vec V_2+vec V_3=0
(look at the picture attached).
 
Projections on the x and y axes give us
-v+2v cos alpha + 2v cos beta =0,  or  2(cos alpha + cos beta)=1,  and
2v sin alpha = 2v sin beta,  so  alpha = beta.
 
Thus from the first equation we have
4cos alpha=1, or  alpha=arccos(1/4) approx 75.5^@.
The angle in question is  180^@-alpha approx 104.5^@.
 
http://www.ux1.eiu.edu/~cfadd/1350/09Mom/ConsMom.html

In Shakespeare's poem, "Let Me Not to the Marriage of True Minds" the speaker says love "is a star to every wandering bark." The star is functioning as...

In this sonnet, the star is functioning as something that is constant, something a wanderer could look to in order to get his bearings and know where he is. Without the aid of modern navigational instruments and technology, the traveler on the sea would have to count on the stars to provide something constant by which to steer. The speaker of the poem says, "It is the star [...]," and the it refers directly to love. Thus, the star in the poem is a metaphor for love. A metaphor is a comparison of two unalike things where the poet says that one thing is another. This particular metaphor comparing love to a guiding star suggests that love can provide the same kind of constant reassurance and guidance that the stars can.

In Shakespeare's Sonnet 116, the speaker compares love to "a star to every wandering bark." This is a metaphor in which love is compared to the North Star or a constellation that is used by sailors to guide their ships, or "barks." In Shakespeare's time, sailors would often guide their boats at night by looking at the North Star, as it did not change direction in the sky. The North Star provided them with guidance through the dark seas in the days before modern navigational tools.
In this sense, the speaker is saying that love is a force that can guide people when they are lost and that provides them with direction when they are at sea (metaphorically speaking). Therefore, the star in this sonnet functions as a metaphor that stands for the ways in which love can provide people with guidance and direction.