During the winter, how does Dexter reflect upon his summer activities?

During the winters, Dexter skis over the snow-covered Sherry Island Golf Course where, during the summers, he works as a caddie. Though the winter closes on Minnesota like "the white lid of a box," his experiences with the wealthiest members of the community during the summer motivate him in the winter. In the autumn, he has fantasies of grandeur, of impressing Mr. Mortimer Jones, the most prominent citizen in Black Bear, Minnesota, with diving tricks at the golf club's pool or of ordering imagined employees around.
Dexter wants to become like the men on his golf course and uses his observations of them during the summer to imagine what kind of man he wants to be. Though it depresses him to see the golf course—a site of so much activity during the summer—become still and blanketed in white during the winter, that "blank" white space becomes the space where he creates his dreams.

What does William Shakespeare mean when he says "to be or not to be" in Hamlet?

Hamlet is not pondering suicide he is pondering action. Having thought through his plan to catch the conscience of the king, Hamlet is faced with the consequences of his action to come. He can idly suffer at the hands of fortune or he take charge of his own destiny. Hamlet sets up quite a quandary: quietly suffering in one's own cowardice or actively battling one's ocean of troubles. As Harold Jenkins in the Arden Hamlet points out, taking arms against a sea of troubles does not end one's troubles rather they ultimately end you.
Hamlet in this speech is speaking in the third person and generalizing the dilemma for all persons similarly situated. But what he is saying in light of his own situation is that if he goes through with his plan to catch the king, he places his own life on the line. This point is specifically expressed in his 4.4 soliloquy as he observes another prince do precisely that. It's no coincidence that as Hamlet departs for England he is in the same boat, so to speak, as Prince Fortinbras because Claudius intends to take Hamlet's life.
Hamlet isn't worrying about taking his own life, he is worrying about someone or something else taking his life in the active engagement of life's troubles. Turning resolution into action has consequences that Hamlet is not sure he is prepared to meet.
Hamlet's thoughts on suicide occur at two places in the play. The first is in his first soliloquy in Act 1 Scene 2 where he recognizes that "self-slaughter" is against God's commandment (i.e. Thou shall not kill). Here, Hamlet is being over dramatic: youthful hyperbole. His morose expressions establish his youth and an unrealistic view of death. His mood is sullen having suffered the tongue lashing from Claudius and Gertrude. Denied his studies, the crown, the alliance of his mother and the guidance of his father, Hamlet feels like he has no purpose. He says it is only the stain of sin that keeps him from killing himself. This all changes when his father's spirit challenges him.
Second at the end of the play as Hamlet lays dying, Horatio expresses the desire to follow Hamlet in death. Hamlet rejects Horatio's attempt. Like the Ghost's injunction to Hamlet, Horatio has a purpose. He wants Horatio to carry on Hamlet's memory and champion his good name. Remember me.
Much ink is spilled over the idea that Hamlet's soliloquy in 3.1 expresses suicidal ideation. This interpretation is misguided. Toward the end of his speech Hamlet does mention that life can be surrendered by a mere bodkin. Here, Hamlet is expressing the frailty of the human body and the ease with which life can be taken. The difficulty in taking a life does not lie in the body's resistance to harm; rather, it is the resistance of the will. This furthers the thought on the hesitation between resolution and action which is the theme of the soliloquy as a whole. Hamlet is not worrying about killing himself he is concerned about being killed at the hands of another. More generally (and Hamlet is frequently occupied in searching for universal principles) Hamlet realizes that taking arms against a sea of troubles, i.e., meeting the day-to-day travails of life's burdens, may ultimately shortens ones life.

In Act 3, Scene 1 of Hamlet, the main character utters what would become one of the most common allusions in all of literature:  "to be or not to be."  This line is written by Shakespeare, but spoken by the character of Hamlet.  "To be or not to be" hinges around the verb "to be," in other words "to exist."  Once you put the line into that context, a reader can easily see what Hamlet is pondering:  to exist or not to exist.  Most scholars agree that Hamlet is considering whether or not to commit suicide.  At this point in the play, Hamlet is completely distressed that his uncle killed Hamlet's father and then married Hamlet's mother. This entire soliloquy involves Hamlet pondering the question of suicide and then giving reasons as to why he should kill himself.  Of course, Hamlet does not go through with suicide.  He later reasons that "conscience does make cowards of us all."  Here Hamlet admits that, due to the fear of hell, Hamlet becomes a coward and cannot act.  (Many consider inaction to be Hamlet's tragic flaw.)  There is a great irony in that, while Hamlet contemplates suicide but fails to do so, Ophelia contemplates suicide and succeeds in doing so.  According to Hamlet's theory, then, Ophelia is the character with more courage.

int_1^oo 6/x^4 dx Determine whether the integral diverges or converges. Evaluate the integral if it converges.

An integral in which one of the limits of integration is infinity is an improper integral.  Because we cannot find the definite integral using infinity (since it is not an actual value), we will need to rewrite the improper integral as a limit, shown below:
int_1^oo 6/(x^4)dx=lim_(n->oo)int_1^n 6/(x^4)dx
We can now take the integral first and the limit second.  We can find the integral using the power rule:
lim_(n->oo)int_1^n 6/(x^4)dx=lim_(n->oo)int_1^n 6x^-4dx=lim_(n->oo)[6*x^-3/-3]_1^n=lim_(n->oo)[-2/x^3]_1^n
Now we simply need to evaluate the limit. As n approaches infinity, the fraction will approach 0:
lim_(n->oo)-2/n^3-(-2)/1^3=lim_(n->oo)-2/n^3+2=0+2=2
Thus the integral converges to a value of 2.

I need one more point for my thesis statement for my 5 paragraph essay. Can you help me with another point I can make for another paragraph and, once you do, give me some ideas of what I can talk about in the paragraph. I bolded the thesis statement. Here is the question: Essay question: In The White Tiger, Balram’s father states that “my whole life I have been treated like a donkey. All I want is that one son of mine—at least one—should live like a man.” (26) By the end of the novel, does Balram’s father’s wish come true? Please formulate a clear, specific thesis on this topic and discuss it. To do so, consider what it means to live “like a man.” Is personal freedom necessary for a fully human life? Is Balram free at the end of the novel or is he entrapped by his prior choices? If being a man constitutes an individual who is able to utilize his own freedom of choice to be moral and honest with others and themselves, then Balram is a character that does not live like a man in the novel The White Tiger by Aravind Adiga. Balram decides that his own personal freedom and his chance to escape his humble origins to eventually live the life of a wealthy entrepreneur seem to justify murdering his master, Mr. Ashok, which causes the death of his family. He lives with the knowledge that he has committed murder and that he has likely caused the murder of his own family. Although Balram believes that he is living like a man, his actions throughout the story shows immorality and (I can’t think of anything) (can you help me think of something) ( I need one more point here because it is a 5 paragraph essay)

I think what is missing within your thesis statement is an acknowledgement that Balram lacks a sense of accountability for his actions and ignores the consequences of them—or, at the very least, he disregards those consequences. This should ideally be your final point for your five paragraph essay. I would also make an adjustment to your thesis so that it ends with a "so what?" point. You say Balram is showing "immorality," so a reader will then ask, "so what?" You must be able to answer this question. Why is it significant that Balram behaves immorally? How does that weigh or not weigh on his conscience? How does it weigh on his identity as a man?
In your introductory paragraph, you've suggested that being "a man" means that one must use their own freedom of choice to uphold a moral code and to be honest with oneself and others. You've also made the distinction that Balram misappropriates the freedom he has attained in order to violate the general accepted code of morality and to advance his own agenda. 
We can clearly conclude from what you're arguing that you don't see Balram as "living like a man." You've clearly stated that in your introduction. I would drive that point home once more in your thesis while still addressing one of the primary questions: "Is personal freedom necessary for a fully human life?" 
From what you've written, it would seem that you think that it is necessary; thus, you must account for how Balram abuses that freedom which would otherwise make him human. 
So, in my opinion, your new thesis should read something like this:
Although Balram believes that he is living like a man, his actions throughout the story show immorality and demonstrate that he consistently neglects the consequences of his own actions; his selfishness and lack of accountability for his behaviors may be byproducts of his new ability to exercise his freedom, but they also mark him as "less than a man" and, perhaps, even a bit inhuman.
I would then reference in the paragraph how Balram neglects the consequences of his behaviors. You could talk about how he does this on the behalf of others. For example, think of all the times Balram exercised free will to help his boss do something less than appropriate: he assists with the cover up of the murder of the beggar child, the boss's visits to the prostitute, and so on. Balram may have been under pressure in these situations, but he still had the opportunity to say no; he simply would have had to face the consequences of doing so. Instead, he was a participant. 
You may also talk about how Balram neglects the consequences of behavior he is not pressured into—such as the murder of his boss, his own involvement in clandestine sexual situations, and so on. 
Ultimately, you can consider how Balram is not the victim here but rather an agent of his own choices who consistently chooses wrong. This renders him unlike a man by your guidelines because it emphasizes his lack or morality and his negligence when it comes to understanding his own impact on the world.

How does Petrocelli discredit Mr. Sawicki's testimony?

Mr. Sawicki is Steve Harmon’s film club adviser. He is brought forward as a character witness for Steve, explaining all the positive things that Steve has done through his film class and how he believes that Steve is an honest person. When he testifies, he says that Steve is sincere in his depiction of the neighborhood, and as a result, he is an honest person in general.
Petrocelli, the prosecuting attorney, uses two tactics to discredit Mr. Sawicki’s testimony. The first is showing that he didn’t know where Steve was on the day of the murder,

PETROCELLI
What was he doing on the afternoon of December 22nd? Did he show you a film of that day?
SAWICKI
No, he did not.

If Sawicki is just a character witness, then it makes his testimony less powerful. Petrocelli is seeking to discredit his power as a witness by showing he doesn’t actually know Steve that well, and that he doesn’t know what happened on the day of the murder because there was no film or other story involved.
The other tactic is to show that Sawicki liked Steve, which proves that he might be blinded by his feelings instead of an objective witness. The idea that he could be blinded might mean that he would testify for the boy without really knowing what he got up to in his neighborhood. Petrocelli says,

As a matter of fact, you like him quite a bit, don’t you?

The prosecutor is working to make it seem like his testimony is all a ruse to make Steve out to be a good kid. If Sawicki likes Steve, he might also be willing to lie for Steve. Not only that but while he thinks he knows Steve through his films, Petrocelli points out that he might not know Steve, except how he acts in the classroom, which could be different than how he behaves in his neighborhood.

Mr. Sawicki runs the film club at Steve Harmon's high school and testifies on Steve's behalf during the trial. When O'Brien questions Mr. Sawicki about Steve's character, Mr. Sawicki says that he thinks Steve is an outstanding young man. He also mentions that Steve is a compassionate, honest individual. When Petrocelli cross-examines Mr. Sawicki, she asks him if he is from Steve's neighborhood. Petrocelli then asks Mr. Sawicki if it is fair to say that he doesn't know what Steve does in his neighborhood after school. Mr. Sawicki replies by saying that it would not be fair to make that statement because Steve's films give an accurate depiction of his life outside of school. Petrocelli then asks Mr. Sawicki if he knows what Steve was doing on December 22nd, and Mr. Sawicki comments that Steve did not show him film from that day. When Petrocelli asks Mr. Sawicki if he feels that the ability to make films means that a person is honest, Mr. Sawicki says,

"It is my belief that to make an honest film, one has to be an honest person. I would say that. And I do believe in Steve's honesty" (Myers 241).

Mr. Sawicki then testifies that he is very fond of Steve. Petrocelli discredits Mr. Sawicki's testimony by implying that simply because Steve Harmon has a positive reputation in school it doesn't mean that he acts the same in his neighborhood. She attempts to persuade the jury into believing that Mr. Sawicki is partial towards Steve because he is a good student and that Steve's films do not reflect his true nature.

What is the genre and tone of the poem "An Irish Airman Foresees His Death"?

Yeats's poem "An Irish Airman Foresees His Death" is a dramatic monologue. It is also a lyric poem written by Yeats in memory of Major Robert Gregory, who was shot down by Italian forces.
This poem is very lyrical in its expression of the airman's personal feelings because it is written with a rhyme that has a particular musicality to it. "An Irish Airman Foresees His Death" is written as the monologue of the pilot who has a fatalistic view of his role in World War I. As he meditates, the pilot goes through the conventional reasons for fighting and finds that he does not identify with any of them. He states, "My country is Kiltartan Cross," and the war will bring no change to any Irish lives. The speaker ultimately concludes that he has not joined the war effort out of a sense of duty nor for the acclaim of cheering crowds. With splendid phrasing and emotion, the speaker concludes, 

The years to come seemed waste of breath,A waste of breath the years behindIn balance with this life, this death.

In his poem, Yeats employs anaphora, which is the repetition of a word at the beginning of a line of poetry. For instance, the poet uses the words "Those," "My," and "Nor" in successive lines of the poem to speed the reading of these lines and to join the pair of ideas. Anaphora can also be understood as the repetition of a phrase such as "Those that I," as is illustrated in Yeats's poem:

Those that I fight I do not hate, Those that I guard I do not love [implying the British whose uniform he wears]

Only "a lonely impulse of delight" has driven the pilot to join the British armed forces. Now, the airman wishes his efforts were not "A waste of breath." This phrase in the last stanza suggests the futility of the speaker's life. He knows he is going to die, and his death will not be for the sake of Ireland. Moreover, the switch from the first person to the third person indicates the universal import of the airman's experiences, suggesting that all wars are webs of death in which the life of no individual matters.

In The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian by Sherman Alexie, what is Junior's biggest conflict? Does he ever solve this conflict? If so, how?

Junior's most important conflict is how to get a decent education while remaining connected to his family and friends on the reservation. Junior attends school in Reardan, a white town, because he knows the school system is better there, but he feels disconnected from life on the reservation and from the white people in Reardan. In addition, Rowdy, his best friend, is angry at Junior because he feels Junior has abandoned him. 
Part of the way Junior resolves this conflict is by no longer telling lies to the white kids in Reardan. Junior admits to Penelope, his girlfriend, that he's poor. Junior is surprised by her response: "I figured she was going to march out of my life right then. But she didn't. Instead she kissed me." Junior realizes, "If you let people into your life a little bit, they can be pretty damn amazing." In other words, he realizes that by telling the truth to the kids in Reardan, he can really befriend them and bridge the gulf between them. In the end, Junior is also able to reconcile with Rowdy because they realize that they still have a lot in common, such as shared memories and a love of basketball. Rowdy also tells Junior that he is like "an old-time nomad," which is respected in Native American tradition. That is Rowdy's way of saying that he respects Junior for going to school in Reardan, and the conflict between them is over. 

What is art and its function according to Freud ?

Sigmund Freud was a thought pioneer on a number of topics, but he was potentially most famous for his theories on psychoanalysis to treat patients with mental illness. He developed his own lexicon to express the notion that our subconscious contains unearthed and unacknowledged desires and memories. If these feelings and thoughts are volatile, they can fester and manifest in our normal behavior and feelings in the form of neuroses. Freud essentially tried to help his patients draw out any unresolved matters in their subconscious and consciously address them to cure them of their neuroses. 
Art is a way to transform intangible, unintelligible feelings into an observable, physical form. You may not be able to explicitly explain rage or unfulfilled desire, but you can perhaps sculpt or draw it. Freud viewed art as a means of sublimation, a socially acceptable means of releasing the tension caused by repressed feelings or memories in the subconscious. He even went so far as to speculate that creating art is a means of achieving sexual satisfaction. In Freud's view, the entire creative process was simply diverting repression into a form of beauty or entertainment, rather than letting it devolve into neurotic behavior. 

I need to take a position that explains to what extent religion does or does not belong as part of government policy making. I need to refer to The Scarlet Letter, The Crucible and "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God".

The philosopher George Moore describes basing "ought" statements on "is" statements as a "naturalistic fallacy." In other words, although one can judge the feasibility of ideal and whether a system of ideals is coherent with itself, one cannot real find a secure standpoint from which to judge them. Whether you believe religion has a role in government depends on two things. First, most atheists or agnostics would want government and religion to be separate. On the other hand, if you believe a certain religion to be true, you might wish that to be part of the system of government of your country, assuming that the religion itself is one that advocates a role for religion in government; some religions take this position while other believe that as government is secular by nature, religions would lose their purity and ideals by participating in worldly affairs. 
Both The Scarlet Letter and The Crucible can be used to argue against religion having a role in government because of the possibilities of religious beliefs being used as a cover masquerading for personal jealousies or prejudices. Miller, in particular, is using the Salem witch trials as a stand-in for the anti-communist hysteria of the 1950s, and strongly disapproves of government enforcement of ideological or religious orthodoxies. Hawthorne's own religious beliefs are a matter of scholarly debate, although he was raised a Unitarian and was probably centered in a liberal Protestant tradition that advocated separation of church and state. The Scarlet Letter contrasts moral goodness with outward conformity and thus could be said to make a case against a legalistic national church.
Edwards was part of a movement called the Great Awakening that grounded the religious impulse in intense individual emotion rather than the formal strictures of a state church and thus would have seen state religion as leading to nominal rather than true belief. 
However, even though these three works tend to advocate a separation between religion and government, there is no reason you need to agree with their positions. If you are a follower of a religion that believes that a divine being will punish an entire nation if people in it disobey certain religious laws, for example, you could make a coherent argument for the need for a state religion.

Calculus: Early Transcendentals, Chapter 6, 6.2, Section 6.2, Problem 2

You need to evaluate the volume of the solid obtained by the rotation of the region bounded by the curves y = 1 - x^2 , y = 0 , about x axis, using washer method, such that:
V = int_a^b (f^2(x) - g^2(x))dx, f(x)>g(x)
You need to find the endpoints, hence you need to solve the following equation:
1 - x^2 = 0 => x^2 - 1 = 0 => (x-1)(x+1) = 0 => x = 1, x = -1
You may evaluate the volume
V = pi*int_(-1)^1 (1 - x^2)^2dx
V = pi*int_(-1)^1 (1 - 2x^2 + x^4)dx
V = pi*(int_(-1)^1 dx - 2*int_(-1)^1 x^2 dx + int_(-1)^1 x^4 dx)
V = pi*(x - 2x^3/3 + x^5/5)|_(-1)^1
V = pi*(1 - 2*1^3/3 + 1^5/5 - (-1) + 2*((-1)^3)/3 - ((-1)^5)/5)
V = pi*(1 - 2/3 + 1/5 + 1 - 2/3 + 1/5)
V = pi*(2 - 4/3 + 2/5)
V = pi*(30 - 20 + 6)/15
V = (16pi)/15
Hence, evaluating the volume of the solid obtained by the rotation of the region bounded by the curves y = 1 - x^2 , y = 0 , about x axis, yields V = (16pi)/15.

When poet marked the first road for another day, what did he doubt?

In The Road Not Taken, Frost doubts that he will ever return to this spot and face the same decision, knowing how "way leads on to way." This suggests that the narrator has enough life experience to realize that the future is an endless series of branching decisions that rarely (if ever) lead back to precisely the same set of choices. Even so, the narrator "kept the first for another day", hoping that the future would provide the chance to try the other path, and fulfill his wish to "travel both." The poem ends on a wistful note, stating that in the future, he "shall be telling this with a sigh", and that his decision to take "the one less traveled by...has made all the difference." Does he doubt that he made the right choice? Perhaps; it is not clear. The reader is left to determine whether the outcome of his choice was good or bad. In either case, it is impossible to know what would have happened if the other path were taken - and this, in the end, is what the poem is about.

The Road Not Taken, by Robert Frost, is essentially a poem which metaphorically discusses the theme of how the choices we make in life define us. The narrator comes across two roads in a yellow wood; the roads are both fair and, although the narrator would like to experience both, he needs to choose. In the end, he chooses the one which seems less worn. We could take this as an implication that the narrator tends to make different choices from the majority of people and chooses paths which are less traveled. 
He walks down the main road for a while, but wonders about the other road, thinking to himself that he will one day come back and travel down that one as well. However, here we encounter the narrator's doubt; knowing that one step in one direction leads to many more, he also knows that with every step he is walking further and further from that other road, and will probably never have the possibility to go back.  

And both that morning equally lay
In leaves no step had trodden black.
Oh, I kept the first for another day!
Yet knowing how way leads on to way,
I doubted if I should ever come back.

 
 

Frost, the author of and 'traveler' in the poem doubted that he would ever be back to the spot to take the other road. It is a common thought for all of us at some point. We have a decision to make, a "direction" to decide upon, and wish that we could make more than one choice. As Frost did in "The Road Not Taken," we mentally save the other option for another time but, like Frost, know that it is unlikely that we will ever return to this spot in our lives to actually take that other road.  This poem is a great example of the author's humanness and of the common emotions that his words always bring forth. It also shows his appreciation of the world around him, as he wishes he could take both roads and is prompted to try to remember the other for another time.

Lamentable comedy is an example of what literary term?

There are several literary terms that could be used to describe "lamentable comedy."
First is oxymoron. Oxymoron occurs when two words that mean the opposite are put next to each other, forming a logical contradiction: lamentable means sad or regrettable and comedy means funny or laughable. We can understand how the two words contradict each other: how can a comedy be sad? At the same time, the players inadvertently tell the truth about the play with those words: in their hands, it is a regrettable and comic performance of a tragedy. Because of the nature of how the play is performed, the words therefore become, unintentionally, a double entendre, which indicates they have a double meaning. Shakespeare never met a double entendre he didn't love.
In addition, it is possible the players are using a malapropism when then say lamentable comedy. A malapropism occurs when a wrong word is used that sounds similar to the right one. "Comedy" and "Tragedy" have the same ending, and it is possible the actors meant to use the term comedy, but being lower class people, got confused.
In either case, the effect is comic, mirroring the humorous bumbling of the acting troupe's performance—and the contradictory characteristics of love itself.

This phrase is an example of oxymoron, because the two words "lamentable" and "comedy" are opposites and seem to contradict each other. The situation it describes, The Lamentable Comedy and Most Cruel Death of Pyramus and Thisbe, is ironic because what is intended to be a tragic play is performed so badly by the actors that it becomes uninintentionally hilarious to the audience.
This phrase can be found in A Midsummer Night's Dream to describe a play within a play, put on by Bottom and his acting troupe. The story of Pyramus and Thisbe centers around two lovers whose feuding parents have separated them and who ultimately die in horrible ways; the plot should be entirely tragic, and therefore it is completely inappropriate that it is performed to comedic effect. Because of the ineptitude of the craftsmen who perform, the play becomes hilarious rather than tragic.

I need help with 2 pages of a eulogy about my 81-year-old mother who passed away recently. Here are some facts: She’s had 5 children & 10 grandchildren. I am the oldest. She’s a trader in a market. She’s a committed Christian person.

Perhaps the best thing to do for the eulogy is to express love, happiness, and warmth: the love you have, and especially, the love given in so many ways by your mother. Provide anecdotes from the past; keep the hearts light and make your dear mother's presence be felt.
Because people are mourning, it is important to celebrate the life of the mother, the grandmother, the comforter, the listener, the cook, the lover of your grandfather. Keep the mood cheerful, celebratory.
Tell your listeners something about this dear parent that they do not know. Read something she wrote, or read something that she read or quoted and tell why she loved it. Give away a few secrets about her that will make people cherish her memory, and, perhaps, chuckle a little. Let her be there with all of you. Always use some degree of humor.
_____________
Here's an opener:
There is an Irish proverb: A man's best friend has been and always will be his mother.
As the oldest, you can allude to some things that relate to this proverb. Also, you can take this proverb and say something like "Yes, it's true; a man's best friend is his mother EXCEPT _____and then relate some humorous anecdote in which one of your siblings may have obtained extra favor, or "betrayed" you with a secret or something that is typical of siblings. And you got in trouble! (Bring a smile to people)
Many times a funeral is the occasion at which a person sees relatives that he/she has not seen for years. So stress the reunion of the family.
______________________
Here is a part of a poem that is always cherished by those who hear it; it is a piece that was read at a funeral service:

Death is nothing at all. It does not count. I have only slipped away into the next room. Nothing has happened. 
Everything remains exactly as it was. I am I, and you are you, and the old life that we lived so fondly together is untouched, unchanged. Whatever we were to each other, that we are still. 

(You can read the entire poem at the source listed below:)Source: http://www.familyfriendpoems.com/poem/death-is-nothing-at-all-by-henry-scott-holland
Or write your own poem with your siblings!
Condolences to you; your mother must have been a distinctly clever and dear, dear woman. And to be so loved—why, it is everything—just everything!
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/10-things-i-learned-while_b_5923558

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44107/holy-sonnets-death-be-not-proud

What is the symbolism of the bad weather at the end of the story "The Scarlet Ibis"?

The storm at the end of “The Scarlet Ibis” by James Hurst portends impending disaster just as the first storm does earlier in the story. The Scarlet Ibis arrived in the yard as a result of being carried off course by a storm. It was weak, and out of its element which resulted in its death.
At the end of the story, the storm rolls as the boys are rowing in the creek. As the storm clouds gather, Brother has Doodle row them back to the Horsehead Landing, which taxes his strength and mind. He is frightened by the storm. After the death of the Scarlet Ibis, he seems to know what his own fate will be.

Black clouds began to gather in the southwest, and he kept watching them, trying to pull the oars a little faster. When we reached Horsehead Landing, lightning was playing across half the sky and thunder roared out, hiding even the sound of the sea. The sun disappeared and darkness descended, almost like night.

The symbolism is parallel to the first storm, only this time its victim is Doodle. He is so exhausted from rowing he is unable to keep up with Brother who runs ahead to get out of the rain. When Doodle can no longer continue running, he takes shelter under the red nightshade bush where he dies. The situational symbolism of the storms results in the death of both the Scarlet Ibis and Doodle. They were fragile creatures, out of their element, who were taken too soon.

Intermediate Algebra, Chapter 4, 4.2, Section 4.2, Problem 6

Solve the system of equations $
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

-3x + y - z =& -10 \\
-4x + 2y + 3z =& -1 \\
2x + 3y - 2z =& -5

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$.


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

-9x + 3y - 3z =& -30
&& 3 \times \text{ Equation 1}
\\
-4x + 2y + 3z =& -1
&& \text{ Equation 2}
\\
\hline

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$



$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

-13z + 5y \phantom{+3z} =& -31
&& \text{Add}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$



$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

6x - 2y + 2z =& 20
&& -2 \times \text{ Equation 1}
\\
2x + 3y - 2z =& -5
&& \text{Equation 3}
\\
\hline

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$



$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

8x + y \phantom{-23z} =& 15
&&

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$



$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

-13x + 5y =& -31
&& \text{Equation 4}
\\
8x + y =& 15
&& \text{Equation 5}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


We write the equations in two variables as a system


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

-13x + 5y =& -31
&&
\\
-40x - 5y =& -75
&& -5 \times \text{ Equation 5}
\\
\hline

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$



$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

-53x \phantom{-5y} =& -106
&& \text{Add}
\\
x =& 2
&& \text{Divide each side by $-53$}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$



$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

-13(2) + 5y =& -31
&& \text{Substitute $x = 2$ in Equation 4}
\\
-26 + 5y =& -31
&& \text{Multiply}
\\
5y =& -5
&& \text{Add each side by $26$}
\\
y =& -1
&& \text{Divide each side by $5$}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$



$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

-3(2) + (-1) - z =& -10
&& \text{Substitute $x = 2$ and $y = -1$ in Equation 1}
\\
-6 - 1 - z =& -10
&& \text{Multiply}
\\
-7 - z =& -10
&& \text{Combine like terms}
\\
-z =& -3
&& \text{Add each side by $7$}
\\
z =& 3
&& \text{Divide each side by $-1$}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


The ordered triple is $(2,-1,3)$.

What part of the victim's body do the ants always attack first in "Leiningen Versus the Ants"?

"Leiningen Versus the Ants," a classic short story by Carl Stephenson, posits an attack of large, venomous, thumb-sized ants upon the owner and workers on a plantation in the rainforest of Brazil. This huge, insatiable swarm of reddish-black, long-legged ants gnaws to the bone any living animal it encounters in its path.
In fact, the first passage that describes the attacks in general says that "wherever they encountered bare flesh they bit deeply," implying that there may not be a particular place where ants always attack first. The first specific description of an attacked man says that the ants hang onto the length of his arm up to his shoulder and that the ants have to be removed and killed one by one by another man.
After these passages, though, Stephenson describes a stag fully covered with ants that dies on the far side of a ditch from Leiningen. The plantation owner observes that, "as usual," the ants had attacked its eyes first, and it had then run into the swarm.
At the climax of the tale, Leiningen must ride two miles through the ants to reach the dam and flood his plantation. He covers his body as best he can with protective clothing, including close-fitting mosquito goggles, "knowing too well the ants' dodge of first robbing their victims of sight." When the ants get under his clothing, though, they bite deeply into any portion of flesh they encounter, so that when he successfully makes it back to the ranch house, he is grievously wounded all over his body.
In conclusion, the ants' ultimate purpose is to blind their victims to render them helpless, but they will attack first any area of flesh that is exposed.

The ants first attack—and then consume—the eyes of their victim so it will be blinded. They also bite wherever flesh is exposed because they can inject their poison into the victim.
During the war between Leiningen and the "act of God," one peon strikes at a clump of ants with his spade, but does not pull it back quickly enough, and the ants swarm up the wooden haft. Unfortunately, he does not drop it in time before the ants are upon him.

They lost no time; wherever they encountered bare flesh they bit deeply; a few, bigger than the rest, carried in their hindquarters a sting which injected a burning and paralyzing venom.

Later, Leiningen sees a pampas stag that is covered by ants. "As usual they had attacked its eye first." Witnessing this poor, tortured animal causes Leiningen to imagine what could easily be his fate, too. He wonders if he should have listened to the official, and if, in his inflated pride, he may have taken on more this time than he can manage.

What were the flattering words of the spider which made fly get flattered?

The spider compliments the fly's beauty and says that if she steps into his parlor, he will let her view her loveliness in a mirror that he has. At first she says no but flies away calling him "gentle sir," which shows that his flattery about her appearance is beginning to work. Of course, a fly is not generally considered beautiful at all.
When he sees her again, the spider repeats his flattering words about her beauty, saying the following:

Come hither, hither, pretty fly, with the pearl and silver wing:Your robes are green and purple; there’s a crest upon your head;Your eyes are like the diamond bright

Instead of flying away, the fly comes closer, thinking about her beauty. Focused on herself and the idea her enemy has planted in her head about her loveliness, she begins to lose her wise fear of the murderous spider.
As she comes closer, beguiled by his words, the spider strikes and makes a meal of her.
Interestingly, the fly is gendered as "she," perhaps implying that females are prone to believe flattery about their looks and that this can lead them into dangerous situations.

Why is the poet like "air"?

The speaker in the poem describes herself as someone who is powerful in every circumstance, with “diamonds” at the juncture of her thighs. She is like air because she is rising upwards, despite what others may think. The speaker details the fact that she began life as a descendant of slaves; by comparison to this, there can be no doubt that the servant has transcended what was expected of him or her and has become more than was ever expected of him or her. The servant has triumphed in his or her move upwards and has therefore become the epitome of the statement that the poet is, like air, free and floating above everyone else in the approach to the divine. In possessing a true approach to all others, one becomes, like Angelou, the “air” of one’s society, connecting the pieces together.

Calculus of a Single Variable, Chapter 7, 7.5, Section 7.5, Problem 7

Hooke's law states that a force is needed to stretch or compress a spring by a distance of x. The force is proportional to the distance x. It is written as F = kx
where:
F = force
k = proportionality constant or spring constant
x = length displacement from its natural length
Applying the given variable force: F= 20 pounds to stretch a spring a total of 9 inches, we get:
F=kx
20=k*9
k=20/9
Plug-in k =20/9 on Hooke's law , we get:
F = (20/9)x
Work can be define with formula: W = F*Deltax where:
F = force or ability to do work.
Deltax = displacement of the object’s position
With force function: F(x)= (20/9)x and condition to stretch the spring by 1 foot (or 12 inches) from its natural position, we set-up the integral application for work as:
W = int_a^b F(x) dx
W = int_0^12 (20/9)xdx
Apply basic integration property: int c*f(x)dx= c int f(x)dx .
W = (20/9)int_0^12 xdx
Apply Power rule for integration: int x^n(dx) = x^(n+1)/(n+1) .
W = (20/9) * x^(1+1)/(1+1)|_0^12
W = (20/9) * x^2/2|_0^12
W = (20x^2)/18|_0^12
W= (10x^2)/9|_0^12
Apply definite integral formula: F(x)|_a^b = F(b)-F(a) .
W = (10(12)^2)/9-(10(0)^2)/9
W =160 - 0
W=160 inch-lbs

How did the people in Kingcome bury their dead?

The Kwakiutl people in Kingcome, British Colombia, did not traditionally bury their dead at all. In fact, they believed that burying people underground, as Europeans do, would prevent the spirit of that person from ever being reincarnated as a person; it would instead be trapped in the body of an earth-dwelling creature, such as a worm or beetle.
Instead of burials, the funerary practices of the Kingcome people involved a complex ritual wherein the dead person's body would be put into a coffin-like box, but the box would not be closed, as this would prevent the spirit from escaping. The hands and face of the dead person were then painted red and the box was suspended from treetops until it was eaten by birds. This type of death ritual is found in many countries all over the world.
A later development of this ritual was for the bodies to be placed in wooden boxes, but the people were still reluctant to put these boxes underground, for the reasons stated above. Only when they were compelled to do so by the colonial occupiers did the people begin to bury their dead under the ground.

In what ways did India contribute to the religion of the world?

Not only has India, as a nation, contributed to the diverse makeup of religions in the world, but it perhaps has no rival other than Palestine for being the birthplace of what the Western world deems the "major" religions.
India is traditionally associated most with Hinduism, and as a religion with nearly a billion followers, Hinduism has become one of the world's leading spiritualities. It is reflected in a number of local traditions and may contrast with Abrahamic traditions for its variety and flexibility. The Sanskrit language is used in many of its foundation texts, including the Vedas, and has provided the basis for a national (and religious) literature.
But Hinduism is not the only religious contribution India has made to the world; while many associate Buddhism with East Asia, founder Siddhartha Gautama was a native of the Indian subcontinent. Siddhartha, who later became known as "the Buddha" (Sanskrit for "the enlightened one"), sought to reform the native Indian religion and sparked a theological revolution that continues to this day.
In the region of the Punjab, Sikhism was founded in the late fifteenth century by a man known as Guru Nanak and has since spread over the world via the Punjabi diaspora. According to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, "in the early 21st century there were nearly 25 million Sikhs worldwide." Other Indian contributions to world religion involve a history of Zoroastrianism as well as Christianity after, according to tradition, the arrival of the Apostle Thomas.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Buddhism

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hinduism

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Sikhism

What are three characteristics of Usher?

The narrator of the story says that Roderick's "reserve had been always excessive and habitual." This means that he has always been likely to check his true feelings and impulses around other people, exercising restraint and self-command. The narrator also says that

his very ancient family had been noted, time out of mind, for a peculiar sensibility of temperament, displaying itself, through long ages, in many works of exalted art, and manifested, of late, in repeated deeds of munificent yet unobtrusive charity, as well as in a passionate devotion to the intricacies, perhaps even more than to the orthodox and easily recognizable beauties of musical science.

Thus, it seems as though Roderick Usher has been quite generous in providing charity to others, and he has been passionately devoted to the arts and music as well. The narrator also discusses the fact that the entirety of the Usher family lays "in the direct line of descent." In other words, the Ushers have long married and had children with their close relatives, and this means that Roderick is also the product of incest and may conduct an incestuous relationship of his own.  
In addition, Roderick tells the narrator about the illness that has so altered his physical appearance since the last time they were together.  He says it is "a constitutional a family evil . . . —a mere nervous affection . . . which would undoubtedly soon pass off." This malady shows itself as a severe acuteness of sense: his senses are working in overdrive, so to speak: faint light is too bright, floral odor is too intense, and so forth. He wants to die rather than continue suffering in this way.  

In your view, what are the keys to defining terrorism? What is your definition? (make your own based on the readings and the keys you pointed out in the previous question). Explain your definition.

This question is opinion based, with that said, there can be no wrong answers. Just as long as you have reasoning for your answer, anything you put should suffice.
With that noted, my definition of terrorism is, anyone or anybody who willing acts is a seditious way toward a fellow citizen. To back this up, I would like bring up the Charleston shooting. It is my understanding the shooter was not a foreigner, therefore it eliminates the broader definition of terrorism being limited to foreigners.
Again this question is an opinion based, and from the instructions it looks as though they want you to answer your question with facts from a reading. Gather your thoughts before you type them down, and make sure you support your answer with evidence.

This question asks you to give your own personal view, so your definition of terrorism may not be the same as mine or as that of your classmates. However, the first step in reaching your personal definition is to consider how others might define the term, and then draw your own conclusions based on this research.
There has been no universally accepted definition of terrorism worldwide, but your "keys to defining terrorism," might include assessing what key elements terrorism is generally thought to have, for example, that terrorism involves violence against civilians, that it has politicized goals, and/or that it, in accordance with the term itself, has the intention of spreading terror or a sense of fear among the population. Beyond this, however, it can be difficult to assess what is terrorism and what is not. We might say that terrorist attacks take us by surprise, but on the other hand, some terrorist groups announce their attacks before they happen.
What is the difference, in your view, between a terrorist and a freedom-fighter? Some define the difference as being that freedom fighters do not target civilians, but many described Nelson Mandela as a terrorist. We might then say that terrorism involves attacks on a worthy system, whereas freedom fighters are those who attack corrupt systems——but how do we decide which is which? What are the goals of terrorism; are they to raise awareness of a cause, or do terrorists seek to actually be granted concessions?
Based on your answers to the above questions, then, you may come to a definition of terrorism as, for example, "violent attacks with political motivation, intended to spread fear among the civilian population or achieve political goals."

Why does Miss Strangeworth feel that she is justified in sending the letters?

In Shirley Jackson’s “Possibility of Evil,” Miss Strangeworth feels justified in sending the letters to the townspeople because she believes that it is her work to keep the town “clean and sweet.” She views the town as “her town” and the people as “her people,” so it is her duty to know everyone else’s problems, whether real or imagined. It is also her duty to warn people of possible problems that may come their way. She believes that “people everywhere were lustful and evil and degraded, and needed to be watched; the world was so large, and there was only one Strangeworth left in it.” She sees herself as the town’s caretaker who ensures that everything runs smoothly in the town. Notice that she detests “sloppiness of any sort,” and she is quick to notice that Miss Chandler, for instance, has not made her hair on a given day and that most of the town people “seem disturbed” in recent days. She sees it as her role to maintain order in the town and the letters are a means of achieving this goal.
Further, she dismisses the pain that the anonymous letters may cause the recipients by claiming that “wickedness is never easily banished, and a clean heart is often a scoured heart.” She believes that the letters are so helpful to the recipients that the pain they cause is little payment for the overall good received.

What does guardian of the peace mean in "After Twenty Years" by O. Henry? How did the officer suit the role of guardian of the peace?

I understood the term "guardian of the peace" to be synonymous with the term "police officer." "Guardian of the peace" or "guardians of the peace" may have been used frequently in newspapers and magazines as alternative terms for "policeman" or "police officer." O. Henry says this policeman makes a fine picture of a guardian of the peace because of the description he gives of him in the first part of the sentence.

Trying doors as he went, twirling his club with many intricate and artful movements, turning now and then to cast his watchful eye down the pacific thoroughfare, the officer, with his stalwart form and slight swagger, made a fine picture of a guardian of the peace. 

His "stalwart form and slight swagger" especially contribute to his "fine picture of a guardian of the peace."
What is most important in O. Henry's description of this particular police officer is that he wants to avoid any suggestion that this might be the man Bob is waiting for in the doorway of the hardware store. O. Henry is describing a typical New York uniformed cop. By the time this cop gets to Bob, the reader will have no suspicion that he is actually Jimmy Wells and that he has come there to meet his old friend. The reader is misled to believe that this is a beat cop who stops to talk to Bob because Bob looks a little suspicious standing in the darkened doorway of a closed store in a neighborhood where almost all the other stores are closed for the night. The fact that this guardian of the peace has been trying doorways all along the block to make sure they are properly locked contributes to the reader's impression that this is a typical cop who has no relationship with the man in the doorway.
As a matter of fact, Jimmy Wells really is a typical New York beat cop. He has obviously been a cop for years. O. Henry describes how he is "twirling his club with many intricate and artful movements" in order to suggest that he has had plenty of years to practice those intricate and artful movements. Jimmy would be forty years old now. He has probably been a cop for almost twenty years. Over time, he has settled into his role as a uniformed beat cop. It is evident in everything he does. Bob describes Jimmy as someone who would like a routine job.

He was a kind of plodder, though, good fellow as he was. 

Jimmy's job is perfect for him, and the reader can tell he is happy with it. That would explain the way he plays with his police club and why he walks with a slight swagger. He is probably married, has several children and owns a modest house. He likely works in his garden and takes his family to church every Sunday. He is not wealthy or flashy like Bob, but he has peace of mind and security, whereas Bob will be going off to prison after years of being on the lam.

What is author Simon Burt's purpose in the story "I Just Kept On Smiling"?

It appears that the author's purpose in the story is to highlight the alienation a young boy can experience in a morally stifling and sterilized environment. Additionally, such an environment may unintentionally compound the dysfunction already present in his life.
In the story, the unnamed narrator is a twelve-year-old boy who attends a Catholic boarding school. It's interesting that the author never names this boy; perhaps the boy represents all boys who feel alienated from their parents and other authority figures in their lives. The narrator in the story is obviously unhappy. There's clearly no loving, emotional connection between him and the rest of his family. When he receives cards from his brother and parents on his birthday, the narrator simply throws them away after opening them. They hold no sentimental value for him.
Later, the boy' parents arrange for him to spend a week after Easter with Nicky Carver's family. The narrator's parents never discuss the matter with him; they just assume his acquiescence as a matter of habit. It is apparent that this obvious lack of communication between them is an indication of deeper dysfunction within the family structure. This dysfunction manifests itself in the narrator's actions.
The narrator steals three exercise books and revels in his secret. He experiences an intoxicating feeling of power and invincibility because he's succeeded in stealing the books from right under his teacher's nose. His actions don't faze him, and we are led to question why. In the end, when the narrator is angry with Nicky Carver for fraudulently confessing to the theft of the exercise books, we realize the dysfunction in the narrator's life is deeper than we think. The narrator is angry because Nicky successfully diminished his sense of power and autonomy; now he can no longer claim his theft as a secret only he can savor.
Yet, the narrator's rationale causes us to question why he keeps smiling after he catches Nicky Carver's eye at the end of the story. Has the narrator switched focus? Is he now reveling in the fact that Nicky has to "pay" for a crime he didn't commit? While the author doesn't answer our questions, choosing instead to let us form our own interpretations about the story, one thing is clear: a morally stifling and emotionally barren environment can often compound the deep dysfunction already present in a young child's life. Exposing this truth may well be the author's purpose in writing this story.

Calculus of a Single Variable, Chapter 6, 6.3, Section 6.3, Problem 14

For the given problem: 12yy'-7e^x=0 , we can evaluate this by applying variable separable differential equation in which we express it in a form of f(y) dy = f(x)dx .
Then, 12yy'-7e^x=0 can be rearrange into 12yy'= 7e^x
Express y' as (dy)/(dx) :
12y(dy)/(dx)= 7e^x
Apply direct integration in the form of int f(y) dy = int f(x)dx :
12y(dy)/(dx)= 7e^x
12ydy= 7e^xdx
int12ydy= int 7e^x dx
For the both side , we apply basic integration property: int c*f(x)dx= c int f(x) dx
12 int ydy= 7int e^x dx
Applying Power Rule integration: int u^n du= u^(n+1)/(n+1) on the left side.
12int y dy= 12 *y^(1+1)/(1+1)
= (12y^2)/2
=6y^2
Apply basic integration formula for exponential function: int e^u du = e^u+C on the right side.
7int e^x dx = 7e^x+C
Combining the results for the general solution of differential equation:
6y^2=7e^x+C
or
(6y^2)/6=(7e^x)/6+C
y^2 = (7e^x)/6+C
y = +-sqrt((7e^x)/6+C)

When the colonies declared independence, what were their ideas about government?

When the colonists declared their independence from Great Britain, they believed that the government’s role was to protect the rights that the people had. They believed that the people had rights that can’t be taken away by the government or given up by individuals. These rights included the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They believed that if the government didn’t protect the rights of the people, then the people had no choice but to get rid of that government and replace it with a new government that would protect those rights. They also believed they needed to tell the world why they were declaring their independence from Great Britain.
The colonists were very concerned that the new government that they were going to create would have too much power. They were fearful that a strong federal government might abuse its powers. They also worried that a strong leader might start acting like the King of England had acted. As a result, the first federal government created by the colonies, known as the Articles of Confederation, was a very weak one with very limited powers and very limited authority.
https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/ar/91857.htm

https://www.history.com/topics/early-us/articles-of-confederation

The Knapp Commission was part of a history of the NYPD (New York City Police Department). Why is it still important today?

Ironically, Frank Serpico became a target of violence among his fellow officers. They became suspicious of him because he was honest and wished to remain so.  Since he refused to take any money, his fellow officers felt they could not trust him.  They attempted to take his life.
Serpico said that if the police of New York City spent as much time fighting crime as they did collecting graft, there would not be any crime in the city.
It was a bad time in the history of the city, but it did expose corruption and brought about a new era of police work and police officers.  

The Commission to Investigate Alleged Police Corruption, known as the Knapp Commission because its chairman was Walter Knapp, was appointed in 1970 under New York City Mayor John Lindsay to investigate police corruption. The committee was formed after Frank Serpico, a long-time New York City police officer and David Durk, a sergeant, revealed corrupt police practices to the New York Times. The article in the Times suggested that Lindsay knew about corruption among the police but had chosen to ignore it. 
After conducting public hearings, the committee convicted several police officers of corruption and made several reforms, including placing undercover agents in each office and making commanders in the police department responsible for the behavior of their officers. The commission is important today because it cracked down on and eliminated the widespread practices of graft and corruption that used to riddle the New York Police Department. While there will always be a small number of police officers who might try to use their jobs to make illegal financial gains, the culture of graft was largely eliminated from the department. 

Read "Freedom" by Rabindranath Tagore. Write some aspects of the structure or form of the poem and connect this analysis to the content of the poem.

Rabindranath Tagore's "Freedom" is a Modernist poem, a lyrical expression of the poet's imagination as well as a strong statement of his political and personal convictions.
In this poem, an expression of the poet's sense of urgency for his people to break from the political bondage of colonial rule, Tagore employs much alliteration, a poetic device which accelerates the line. With this use of alliteration, then, Tagore creates a sense of the need for India's immediate attention to the cause of freedom. For instance, in the third, fourth, and fifth lines of this free verse poem, the alliteration of the phrases with the /b/ (/b/=the sound of the words beginning with b) hurry the line and stress the idea of bondage:

Freedom from the burden of the ages, bending your head,breaking your back, blinding your eyes to the beckoningcall of the future

This use of alliteration is exhibited through the poem, underscoring the theme of the imperative of India's claiming its deserved freedom. In addition, the use of sonic effects, such as the alliteration and the aural imagery of "night's stillness" creates a stirring impact upon the reader. In fact, the two lines in which this image presents itself—

you fasten yourself in night's stillness,mistrusting the star that speaks of truth's adventurous paths—

are meant to have a revolutionary impact and stir people to strive for freedom. It is these metaphoric "adventurous paths" that the poet urges his people to follow.
The free verse in which this poem is written and the direct treatment of the subject of freedom from colonial rule contribute to the theme of India's need for such freedom. Concomitant with this free verse is a freedom of subject matter that itself produces a revolutionary effect which strengthens the message of the poem.
Reinforcing this message of the need to strive for freedom is the repeated use of the beginning phrase of "Freedom from...." and the enumeration of the various forms of oppression under which India exists.
Tagore's poem "Freedom" exhibits the characteristic "unrhymed cadence" of the Modernist movement. This poem displays a direct treatment of the idea of freedom with its free verse. Further, while everyday language is used, there is also the use of the "exact word as opposed to the almost exact word" that is characteristic of Modernist poetry. This crisp language and sharp imagery create an impact that coincides with the revolutionary theme of "Freedom," Tagore's call to his people to cast off the "shackles of slumber"—the passivity of submission to imperialistic rule—and to join Gandhi in resisting the bondage of colonialism.

What three Shakespeare plays can be more relevant to 9th graders?

Based on this question being in the Hamlet category, I believe the question is asking, "What three Shakespeare plays might be more relevant than Hamlet is to ninth graders?"
That's a good question.  It's one that curriculum review committees wrestle with too.  
I believe that Romeo and Juliet is more accessible and relevant to ninth graders.  One reason is that the story is already known by most people.  A general understanding of the events of the play is likely common knowledge to most high school students.  Another reason for its greater accessibility to young people is the fact that Romeo and Juliet are teenagers themselves.  Young readers like to read about characters that are the same age as the readers.  Just look at most young adult literature.  The characters are almost always under the age of eighteen.  The Hunger Games is about teens killing teens.  Unwind is about teens trying not to be killed for body parts.  Twilight is about immortal teens.  Divergent is about teens.  The Maze Runner is about teens.  Romeo and Juliet is about teens which makes it more accessible and relatable to teen readers.  On the whole, Romeo and Juliet is relevant to high school students because they are learning about love and heartache for the first time, and Romeo and Juliet is a play about those very same things.  
I think Much Ado About Nothing is a good choice too.  My reasons on this one are not complex.  First, the play is a comedy.  My problem with Romeo and Juliet has always been the fact that it is a tragedy.  I don't like tragedies, and my students don't tend to like them either.  Why?  Because they are sad.  Much Ado About Nothing reads like a romantic comedy.  It's happy and upbeat through most of the play and loaded with dirty jokes, insults, and bickering.  It's relevant to ninth graders for exactly those reasons.  That's how they act a lot of the time. It's a fun, and funny play to read; therefore, students are more likely to want to read it because they are having fun with it.  Thematically the play shows what can happen to a relationship when there is communication breakdowns.  That fits with high school students too that are learning to communicate with their teachers, their friends, and their significant others.  
For my third suggestion, I recommend The Tempest.  It's a nice mixture of comedy and tragedy, but it most definitely isn't as dark as Hamlet.  The Tempest is definitely on the more exciting side of the spectrum of Shakespeare plays, which ninth graders should appreciate.  It's loaded with action, fighting, and magic for the boys, and the play contains a love plot as well for the girls.  There's tons of Shakespeare style swearing in it too.  Obviously high school students are not dealing with shipwrecks and mystical creatures, so the play is not relevant in that regard.  The play is relevant because its overall plot mirrors the same plot structure and character type that students are already familiar with.  Additionally, it's loaded with love, loss, betrayal, violence, and humor.  These are all things that modern audiences can relate to. 
If I was really forced to do it, I could probably say that any of Shakespeare's plays are still relevant to modern day audiences.  Alan Craven, a modern day literary scholar, would also agree.  He writes the following about Shakespeare's plays and their continued relevance.  

Humans still experience love, loss, betrayal, war, humor and tragedy, which gives Shakespeare a foothold in modern times.    

 

In "The Story of an Hour," by Kate Chopin, why does Chopin withhold the protagonist’s first name until paragraph 17?

Perhaps Chopin chooses to withhold the protagonist's first name for so long because Louise Mallard has been denied a true, personal identity for such a long time. While married, she had to "bend [her] will" to her husband's, and the Victorian woman really had no legal identity whatsoever due to the coverture laws of the time: when a woman married, her husband's identity "covered" hers, legally, and she, in essence, becomes subject to his will, her property becomes his, and so forth. It isn't until her husband dies (or she thinks that he dies) that she begins to believe that she can be "'free, free, free!'" Free of him, she now has a chance to live for herself, do what she wants when she wants, and not have to answer to anyone else or compromise or give way to what someone else wants. Withholding her name draws attention to Louise's lack of identity until she begins to realize her husband's death allows her to have one.

Unlike traditional estate satires, a social form that focuses on the ills of society and how they can be cured, Chaucer’s focus in the “General Prologue” is on individuals and their psychological makeup. Select one or more of his characters and explain how he reveals insight into that character or characters

One of the most interesting aspects of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales is the fact that the narrator is not outside of the tale, giving an omniscient and objective perspective on those he meets. Rather, Chaucer deliberately chooses to put his narrator in the middle of the group of pilgrims, such that his descriptions of them are "so as it semed me." This framing of the story turns a particular lens on all of Chaucer's satires, as we must first decide how far we feel the narrator himself is reliable in his assessment of their "degree." We know that the narrator is heading to Canterbury with self-described "ful devout corage," so the insights he gives into the other characters must necessarily be understood from the perspective of a man who is devout, but also readily describes himself as such without humbleness.
Given this fact, it is interesting, then, that the narrator first chooses to describe the knight, "a worthy man." The narrator's description of the knight begins simply enough—we can assume that the knight has not told the narrator everything which the narrator repeats here, and that the narrator's assessment of him as a lover of "trouthe and honour, fredom and curteisie" is based on observation. As the description of the knight wears on, however, we begin to question how it is that the narrator knows so much about his exploits, if he is a man so full of every knightly courtesy. The list of the knight's successes in battle goes on and on.
By the time we reach line 67, it becomes clear that the knight is, in the estimation of the narrator, such a paragon of virtue as to be a parody of the knights we read about in medieval romances, written contemporaneously with this story. He is both "worthy" and "wys" (prudent), and yet somehow everybody knows about his "soveryn prys." When the narrator declares that the knight has "nevere yet no vilynye ne sayde / in al his lyfe unto no maner wight," the satire reaches its apex. It is simply not possible that the knight has reached adulthood without ever having exchanged cross words with another person, and yet through the use of the frame narrative and unreliable narrator, Chaucer forces us to question at what point this description of the knight has become so hyperbolically virtuous. Is the irony that the knight himself, ostensibly so prudent, has in fact been telling everyone stories of his own great deeds? Or do we question the veracity of the narrator, a man who describes himself as extremely devout, and who may therefore be inclined to put a man he perceives as a virtuous knight upon a pedestal, inspired by the stereotypes to which he has been exposed?
All of Chaucer's descriptions in the General Prologue are offered through this double lens; the narrator often gives details without interpreting what we are to make of the comment, leaving it to us as the audience to interpret from tone how the narrator views the person in question. Other characters who are described in significant detail and might offer good studies for this question include the Prioress and the Frere. Both their portrayals invite us to ask questions about piety, virtue, and the presentation thereof in these tales.

Beginning Algebra With Applications, Chapter 5, 5.3, Section 5.3, Problem 48

Graph $\displaystyle x+3y = 6$ by using the slope and $y$-intercept.

$y$-intercept:


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

x+3y =& 6
&& \text{Given equation}
\\
0 +3y =& 6
&& \text{To find the $y$-intercept, let } x = 0
\\
3y =& 6
&& \text{Simplify}
\\
y =& 2
&&

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


The $y$-intercept is $(0,2)$

Writing the equation in slope form, $y = mx+b$


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

3y =& 6-x
\\
\\
y =& \frac{6-x}{3}
\\
\\
y =& \frac{-1}{3}x + 2

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$



$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

m =& \frac{\text{change in } y}{\text{change in } x}
\\
\\
m =& \frac{-1}{3}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


Beginning at the $y$-intercept, move to the right 3 units and then down 1 unit.







$(3, 1)$ are the coordinates of a second point on the graph.

Draw a line through $(0,2)$ and $(3, 1)$

In the book The War of 1812: A History from Beginning to End by Henry Freeman, what was the main idea, and what are some supporting details of the main idea?

The main idea of The War of 1812: A History from Beginning to End is that the War of 1812 had its roots in conflicts that went back to the previous century and that it was a far-reaching conflict. For example, in Chapter 1, Freeman discusses how the roots of the war went back to the Seven Years' War, which began in 1754, and which involved many major European powers. The War of 1812 itself also involved the interplay between great world powers. For example, Great Britain was still embroiled in fighting the French during the War of 1812, and the interest of the British in the war grew when they had finally stopped fighting the French and turned their attention to attacking New Orleans (which the author discusses in Chapter 9). (The war had actually ended before Andrew Jackson's great victory in New Orleans, but news of the war's end, negotiated in Belgium, had not yet reached the American or British troops in the New World.) The war had far-reaching effects on Great Britain, Canada, and the U.S. The U.S. finally established its independence from Britain, and the border between Canada and the United States was established. 

Was everything Brown saw in "Young Goodman Brown" real or imaginary?

Even though Hawthorne leaves the interpretation of Goodman Brown's experience up to the reader, there are various elements that suggest Brown's experience was indeed imaginary. The magical nature of the enigmatic fellow traveler's staff, the ominous black cloud that follows Brown through the forest, the diverse congregation participating in the Black Mass, and the sudden disappearance of the deacon, minister, and Goody Cloyse suggest that Brown's experience was imaginary. The fact that Brown also uses the traveler's staff to fly through the forest to participate in the Black Mass, where Faith is suddenly present, also suggests that his experience was imaginary.
Regardless of whether Brown's experience was real or imaginary, the outcome of his loss of faith negatively impacts the remainder of Brown's life. After waking up in the forest, Brown becomes suspicious of his community's religious leaders and recognizes them has debased hypocrites who hide their sins and attempt to conceal their wicked actions. Brown lives the remainder of his life as a distant, cynical man who has abandoned all hope and faith in humanity. Through Brown's experience, Hawthorne comments on the nature of faith, religious hypocrisy, loss of innocence, and humanity's inherent nature.

The short answer is that we don't really know whether what Goodman Brown saw was real or if he simply imagined it. At the witches' meeting, he tells his wife, Faith, to resist the Devil, but 

Whether Faith obeyed, he knew not. Hardly had he spoken, when he found himself amid calm night and solitude, listening to a roar of the wind, which died heavily away through the forest. . . .  Had Goodman Brown fallen asleep in the forest, and only dreamed a wild dream of a witch-meeting? Be it so, if you will.

As soon as he tells Faith to resist, the fiery and fiendish scene around him disappears, and Brown stands in the cool, calm forest alone. The narrator says that we are free to believe that Brown had only fallen asleep and dreamed everything he saw. But why? Doesn't it matter whether or not it was real?
Brown lives the remainder of his life as though it were real, as though all of it did really happen. When he sees Faith, happy to see him, he "looked sternly and sadly into her face, and passed on without a greeting." He became a "stern, a sad, a darkly meditative, a distrustful, if not a desperate man . . . from the night of that fearful dream." He cannot stand to hear the congregation sing, to listen to the minister preach. He even "shrank from the bosom of Faith." In other words, he has lost his religious faith. Brown can no longer find solace in the faith he had assumed would simply be there waiting for him to pick up again after his one last night of sin. He had turned his back on God even before he met the Devil in the forest. He had thought to himself: "after this one night, I'll cling to [Faith's] skirts and follow her to Heaven." However, this is not how faith works; one must work, actively and constantly, to abide by God's laws—one cannot simply decide to ignore them one moment and then resume them the next. What Brown saw or did not see in the forest is not important. What is important is that he decided to go into the forest, for some dark intent, in the first place.

By 1993, nations in the European Union (EU) had eliminated all barriers to the flow of goods, services, labor, and capital across their borders. Even such things as consumer protection laws and the types of plugs required to plug in appliances were standardized to ensure that there would be no barriers to trade. How do you think this elimination of trade barriers affected EU output?

The European Union's output significantly improved. The elimination of trade barriers promoted trade to countries in the European Union, as businesses had access to millions of potential customers from different nations. In addition, companies could realize economies of scale by sourcing for raw materials from the cheapest markets without having to pay duty. Moreover, consumers enjoyed a wide variety of goods and services at affordable prices from competitive markets.
The single market improved the European Union’s gross domestic product (GDP). Furthermore, millions of jobs were created, which increased employment rates. Moreover, the increased output by the EU, because of lifting the trade barriers, made it an attractive trading partner to other countries that were not in the EU. Consequently, more goods and services were exported, which contributed to the GDP.

In 1993, the single market became a reality for twelve member countries: Italy, Germany, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Portugal, Greece, Belgium, Denmark, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Spain. Generally, the elimination of trade barriers increased EU output after 1993.
In Economics, output is defined as the total value of all the goods and services produced by a country's economy during a specified time period. As such, output measures the health of an economy. After the elimination of trade barriers in 1993, the free movement of goods and services led to significant growth in output. By 1999, the single-market EU grew from 12 million companies to 21 million companies. Trade between EU countries grew from between 800 billion Euro in 1992 to 2800 billion Euro in 2011. Similarly, trade between EU countries and the rest of the world grew from between 500 billion Euro in 1992 to 1500 billion Euro in 2011.
GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is a measure of economic output: it is the monetary value of all the goods and services produced in a country within a specified time period. Generally, GDP can be calculated in three ways:
1) The production approach, which calculates GDP as the "value added" at each stage of production. Value-added is calculated as total sales minus the value of intermediate inputs. Intermediate inputs is defined as the raw products or materials used during production. For example, a final output such as cake has flour, sugar, butter, and other raw materials as intermediate inputs.
2) The expenditure approach, which adds up the total value of all goods and services purchased by all users (at the individual, corporate, or governmental level).
3) The income approach, which calculates GDP based on consumer and corporate income.
So, after the elimination of trade barriers in 1993, output increased: by 2008, the GDP was 33 billion Euro higher or 2.13% higher than in 1992. Also, by 2008, the average income-per-person rose by about 500 Euro (the income approach).
The elimination of trade barriers greatly benefited EU consumers in terms of increased choices for goods and services. Growth within the telecommunications industry is one example of how the elimination of trade barriers increased EU output. By 1998, 100% of EU consumers had access to mobile phones. Consumer use of cellphones rose from 1 million in 1994 to more than 100 million in 1998 (the expenditure approach). In fact, today, the EU represents the second largest region (after Asia) in terms of consumer access to the Internet. As a result of increased choice in Internet providers, 73% of EU consumers enjoy weekly access to Internet content.
So, to recap, the elimination of trade barriers affected EU output positively after 1993.
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/basics/gdp.htm

In the novel The Kite Runner, why did the author have Assef, Sohrab, and Amir all come together later on in the story?

At the beginning of the novel, Assef challenges both Amir and Hassan on their way to climb a tree. Hassan ends up saving himself and Amir by pointing his slingshot at Assef and threatening him. Assef, disappointed at the fact that Hassan is armed says, "This doesn't end today, believe me...This isn't the end for you either, Amir. Someday, I'll make you face me one on one" (Hosseini 35). Shortly following their controversial interaction with Assef, Assef corners Hassan at the end of a kite-fighting tournament and rapes him while Amir watches at a safe distance. Amir is plagued with guilt for the majority of the novel until he is given a chance at redemption.
Later on in the novel, Amir is older and embarks on a mission to save Sohrab, who is essentially a sex slave to Assef. Sohrab, Hassan's son, is very similar to his father and Amir has to fight Assef one on one in order to leave with Sohrab. Khaled Hosseini chose to bring Assef, Sohrab, and Amir together in Chapter 22 in order to emphasize Amir's chance at redemption while creating a circular narrative. In dramatic fashion, Amir conquers his fear of Assef by fighting him behind closed doors in front of Sohrab and gains redemption by doing so. Sohrab, who represents Hassan, saves Amir by shooting Assef's eye out using his slingshot. The way in which Sohrab saves Amir resembles the way Hassan protected Amir in his youth. Hosseini ties together two significant scenes by having essentially the same characters, engage in similar confrontation.

What two agreements do Mr. Shiftlet and Mrs. Crater make?

The first agreement that Mr. Shiftlet and Mrs. Crater make is that if Mr. Shiftlet works around Mrs. Crater's place, she can feed him and give him a place to stay. However, she cannot pay him. They both fulfill their end of the deal, and Mr. Shiftlet repairs the front and back steps of Mrs. Crater's house, fixes a fence, and even teaches her deaf daughter to say "bird."
The second agreement they make is that if Mr. Shiftlet marries Lucynell, the daughter, he will be able to stay in the house and wed the most innocent girl in the world. Mrs. Crater also gives him money to paint their old car and agrees to give him money for a wedding trip. It is during this trip that Mr. Shiftlet abandons Lucynell and does not live up to his end of the bargain.

In “The Life You Save May Be Your Own.” Mrs. Crater and Mr. Shiftlet prove to be conniving, manipulative, and scheming people. Throughout the story, both characters bargain with each other in hopes of achieving their various desires.
The first agreement is that Mr. Shiftlet may stay on the Crater’s property if he agrees to work. In the discussion, Mrs. Crater tells Mr. Shiftlet, “I told you you could hang around and work for food . . . if you don’t mind sleeping in that car yonder” (O’Connor 1084). In this agreement, both characters seem to be getting something they want. Mr. Shiftlet appears to be a vagabond, needing shelter and food. Mrs. Crater, judging by the dilapidated home and car, needs help maintaining her property.
The second agreement, coming later in the story, is that Mr. Shiftlet will agree to marry Lucynell if Mrs. Crater paints the car and gives him money for a weekend trip. This agreement is much more improper than the first because, essentially, Mrs. Crater bribes Mr. Shiftlet, with a new paint job and seventeen dollars and fifty cents, so he will marry her disabled daughter. However, the plan does not succeed. Mr. Shiftlet drives away with Lucynell, eventually leaving her alone at a diner. Mother and daughter are now separated with little hope of ever reuniting.

Find a poem that can relate to The Kite Runner, and explain how it connects with the book's theme.

William Blake's "A Poison Tree" links well to The Kite Runner. The poem describes what happens when we hold on to anger and allow it to fester rather than dealing with it openly and honestly. In the poem, the speaker holds on to his anger and finds that it grows and grows until it becomes a tree and bears "an apple bright" and poisonous. The poisonous apple is then eaten by an intruder, and the intruder dies beneath the tree.
In The Kite Runner, Amir feels angry towards Hassan because his father seems to love Hassan more than him. He allows this anger to fester and grow until it becomes jealousy and cowardice. In this way, Amir's anger is linked to his decision not to intervene when he sees Hassan being raped. He wants to take the kite back to his father, and he hopes that when his father sees him with the winning kite he will love him more. He knows that if he intervenes in Hassan's rape, Assef and his gang will take the kite, and so he chooses to do nothing. His anger has made him jealous and cowardl, to the point that he chooses to do nothing while Hassan is raped.
This decision poisons the young Amir, and this poison almost kills him, just as it kills the intruder in Blake's poem.
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45952/a-poison-tree

Paul Laurence Dunbar's poem "The Debt" examines themes of grief, regret, and sorrow, which are similarly explored throughout Khaled Hosseini's novel The Kite Runner. Paul Laurence Dunbar writes,

This is the debt I pay Just for one riotous day, Years of regret and grief, Sorrow without relief.
Pay it I will to the end — Until the grave, my friend, Gives me a true release — Gives me the clasp of peace.
Slight was the thing I bought, Small was the debt I thought, Poor was the loan at best— God! but the interest!.

Throughout Dunbar's three stanzas written in rhyming couplets, the speaker describes the years of grief and sorrow he experiences for making a regrettable decision. The speaker does not elaborate on the details of his regrettable action but does describe the years of "sorrow without relief" that will follow him to his grave. The results of the "riotous day" negatively alter the trajectory of the speaker's life and fill him with remorse.
In his poem, Dunbar describes melancholy emotions and unfortunate consequences; in his novel The Kite Runner, Hosseini depicts the results of Amir's regrettable decision and explores the themes of grief, sorrow, anxiety, and regret.
Towards the beginning of the novel, Amir desperately attempts to gain his father's attention and affection but is unable to do so until he wins the kite-fighting tournament. Unfortunately, Amir runs after his friend only to witness Hassan surrounded by Assef and two other boys. Instead of attempting to rescue his friend by intervening, Amir watches from a distance as Assef proceeds to rape Hassan. Following the traumatic event, Amir is filled with guilt and sorrow. Amir is disgusted with himself and can no longer be around Hassan. The two friends stop talking, and Amir even attempts to make it seem like Hassan stole his presents in order to get Hassan kicked out of Baba's home.
Fortunately for Amir, Baba takes him to America, where Amir has a new start to life. Despite Amir's success in America, he still carries with him the burden of watching Hassan being raped and not intervening. Amir's repressed emotions haunt him as an adult, and he becomes an insomniac with a dark secret. Unlike the speaker in Dunbar's poem, Amir is given an opportunity to atone for his past sins and seeks redemption by traveling back to Afghanistan to save Hassan's son, Sohrab. Echoing the "interest" the speaker references in Dunbar's poem, Amir atones for his past sins by taking a severe beating from Assef. Amir almost loses his life in the brawl but finally feels emotional relief following the fight. While Dunbar's poem does not comprehensively apply to Amir's plight, the themes of sorrow, grief, and regret directly correlate to Amir's life and are explored throughout the novel.

Why is Ulrich not able to shoot his enemy when he first encounters him in "The Interlopers" by Saki?

Ulrich von Gradwitz is unable to shoot his enemy when he suddenly encounters him because of the "code of a restraining civilization." This code prohibits shooting a neighbor in cold blood without warning or words exchanged unless the offense is one against a man's honor or his family.
The feud that exists between Ulrich von Gradwitz and Georg Znaeym is simply over a particular strip of very steep woodland on the edge of the Gradwitz forest lands. It is jealously guarded by von Gradwitz because of the fact that it was wrested from the Znaeyms in a famous lawsuit. However, although the Znaeyms lost in the courts, they continue to come on the land and poach, and the feud is continued by the impassioned younger male members of the families. 
One night, as the deer who normally are bedded down are running during a storm wind, von Gradwitz calls upon his foresters to go out and search for any sight or sound of "the marauders." It is on this "wild night," then, that von Gradwitz suddenly is confronted by his mortal enemy, Georg Znaeym. But, in that short moment of civilized conditioning in which they cannot shoot each other, the mighty beech tree around which they are face-to-face is struck by the violence of nature. Suddenly, a mass of branches crashes down upon the two men. Now, helplessly pinioned beneath the broken branches and wounded, the two enemies clearly cannot end their feud as intended.

College Algebra, Chapter 4, 4.6, Section 4.6, Problem 48

Find the intercepts and asymptotes of the rational function $\displaystyle r(x) = \frac{x + 2}{(x + 3)(x - 1)}$ and then sketch its graph.

The $x$-intercepts are the zeros of the numerator $x = -2$.

To find the $y$-intercept, we set $x = 0$ then

$\displaystyle r(0) = \frac{0 + 2}{(0 + 3)(0 - 1)} = \frac{2}{(3)(-1)} = \frac{-2}{3}$

the $y$-intercept is $\displaystyle \frac{-2}{3}$.

The vertical asymptotes occur where the denominator is , that is, where the function is undefined. Hence the lines $x = -3$ and $x = 1$ are the vertical asymptotes.

We need to know whether $y \to \infty$ or $y \to - \infty$ on each side of each vertical asymptote. We use test values to determine the sign of $y$ for $x$- values near the vertical asymptotes. For instance, as $x \to -3^+$, we use a test value close to and to the right of $-3$ (say $x = -2.9$) to check whether $y$ is positive or negative to the right of $x = -3$.

$\displaystyle y = \frac{(-2.9) + 2}{[(-2.9) + 3][(-2.9)] - 1}$ whose sign is $\displaystyle \frac{(-)}{(+)(-)}$ (positive)

So $y \to \infty$ as $x \to -3^+$. On the other hand, as $x \to -3^-$, we use a test value close to and to left of $-3$ (say $x = -3.1$), to obtain

$\displaystyle y = \frac{(-3.1) + 2}{[(-3.1) + 3][(-3.1) - 1]}$ whose sign is $\displaystyle \frac{(-)}{(-)(-)}$ (negative)

So $y \to - \infty$ as $x \to -3^-$. The other entries in the following table are calculated similarly.

$\begin{array}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline\\
\text{As } x \to & -3^+ & -3^- & 1^+ & 1^- \\
\hline\\
\displaystyle \text{the sign of } y = \frac{x + 2}{(x + 3)(x - 1)} \text{ is} & \frac{(-)}{(+)(-)} & \frac{(-)}{(-)(-)} & \frac{(+)}{(+)(+)} & \frac{(+)}{(+)(-)} \\
\hline\\
\text{So } y \to & \infty & - \infty & \infty & - \infty\\
\hline
\end{array} $

Horizontal Asymptote. Since the degree of the numerator is less than the degree of the denominator, then $y = 0$ is the horizontal asymptote.

Write about a method, practice, and/or strategy that Manuel Miranda (In the Heights, Hamilton) has employed that you could use to inform the methods and practices of your own writing.

Lin-Manuel Miranda once posted a picture to Twitter with a caption that read, "Had an idea that might be terrible. Or transcendent. No way to know but to write the ******. *cracks knuckles*." This is a strategy that he is seen to employ multiple times through his postings on social media. Even when he isn't sure if an idea will work, he writes it. He writes it because you can never know how something will be until it's an actual work and no longer just an idea. Other writers can use this attitude to overcome problems such as idea anxiety and writer's block.
It's normal to be worried that your ideas aren't good. The problem comes when this fear keeps you from writing and actually making those ideas into something that other people can read. Maybe you keep ideas in your head or jot them down in a notebook. That's a good start but it isn't how you want to finish. Take an idea and just start working on it. Putting in even 20 minutes per day will eventually get you to a completed draft. Just write it.
Miranda knew he had to take a chance. In Playbill, he describes how he struggled with whether to leave his job as a teacher to pursue writing—or to take the safe route, instead. He opted to leave, and the results were spectacular. You don't have to leave your job, but you can take the chance of simply putting pen to paper, blocking out 30 minutes per day, and starting to actually write out your ideas.
Actually working on a piece when an idea strikes you can help you paint a clearer picture of the original idea you had. Memories fade and blur; ideas slip away and don't come to us nearly as sharply as the original idea itself. When Miranda starts writing, he doesn't know whether the new project will be something that other people will see. He just sits down to do it before he loses the idea and the possibility that it will be something spectacular. Ideas that aren't written don't ever get the chance to shine.
Getting started also gives you a something in which to work. You can edit anything—except a blank piece of paper. No one produces perfect first drafts. Miranda himself takes years to develop, edit, and finalize his ideas. What we see on stage isn't the same thing he originally wrote when the idea formed in his head. It's important to remember that and not judge your own writing against ideas that have been developed and tweaked for long periods of time.
As Manuel reminds the Rolling Stone writer who interviewed him in 2016, he was a substitute teacher when his first play, In the Heights, was written and produced. It was his big break—but he couldn't have known that when he was writing it. You never know how your ideas will develop. So take a page from Miranda's book and just write. You never know where your writing might take you.
http://www.playbill.com/article/where-it-all-begana-conversation-with-lin-manuel-miranda-and-his-father-com-353054

https://twitter.com/Lin_Manuel/status/860425024364306432

https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/hamilton-creator-lin-manuel-miranda-the-rolling-stone-interview-42607/

Calculus of a Single Variable, Chapter 9, 9.5, Section 9.5, Problem 19

We may apply the Ratio Test to determine the convergence or divergence of the series sum_(n=0)^oo (-1)^n/(n!) .
In Ratio test, we determine the limit as:
lim_(n-gtoo)|a_(n+1)/a_n| = L
Then, we follow the conditions:
a) L lt1 then the series is absolutely convergent
b) Lgt1 then the series is divergent.
c) L=1 or does not exist then the test is inconclusive. The series may be divergent, conditionally convergent, or absolutely convergent.

For the series sum_(n=0)^oo (-1)^n/(n!) , we have a_n=(-1)^n/(n!) .
Then, we may let a_(n+1) =(-1)^(n+1)/((n+1)!)
We set up the limit as:
lim_(n-gtoo) |((-1)^(n+1)/((n+1)!)) /((-1)^n/(n!))|
To simplify the function, we flip the bottom and proceed to multiplication:
|((-1)^(n+1)/((n+1)!)) /((-1)^n/(n!))|=|(-1)^(n+1)/((n+1)!) * (n!)/(-1)^n|
Apply Law of Exponent: x^(n+m) = x^n*x^m and (n+1)! = n!(n+1)
|((-1)^n(-1)^1)/(n!(n+1)) * (n!)/(-1)^n|
Cancel out the common factors (-1)^n and n! .
|(-1)^1/(n+1)|
=|-1/(n+1)|
=1/(n+1)
Applying |((-1)^(n+1)/((n+1)!)) /((-1)^n/(n!))|=1/(n+1) , we get:
lim_(n-gtoo) |((-1)^(n+1)/((n+1)!)) /((-1)^n/(n!))|
=lim_(n-gtoo)1/(n+1)
=(lim_(n-gtoo)1)/(lim_(n-gtoo)(n+1))
= 1 /oo
= 0
The limit value L=0 satisfies the condition: L lt1 .
Therefore, the series sum_(n=0)^oo (-1)^n/(n!) is absolutely convergent.

What is the meaning of the phrase "with all our spry young fellows painting the Old World red, and carrying off your best actors and prima-donnas"?

There is a certain timelessness to Oscar Wilde's 1887 story The Canterville Ghost. During both World War II and the so-called "British invasion," there was a sense among many in England that its culture was being spirited away. During the former, American soldiers stationed in England in preparation for the Normandy landings married British women and returned after the war to the United States with their foreign brides. During the "British invasion," American culture was inundated with British influences in the form of The Beatles, Herman's Hermits and many other British bands. Even today, the British often complain when American filmmakers appropriate British history with fictionalized, Americanized, stories of heroism, as was the case with the films The Great Escape and U-571. In this sense, Wilde's novella was more than a little prescient. 
As The Canterville Ghost begins, Lord Canterville is showing his aristocratic family's estate to an American diplomat and the latter's family. During the course of their tour, Lord Canterville, displaying his sense of propriety, warns the American, Hiram B. Otis about the house's macabre history, explaining that the structure has long been haunted by a ghost. Otis's response to this information is revealing:

"My Lord," answered the Minister, "I will take the furniture and the ghost at a valuation. I have come from a modern country, where we have everything that money can buy; and with all our spry young fellows painting the Old World red, and carrying off your best actors and prima-donnas, I reckon that if there were such a thing as a ghost in Europe, we'd have it at home in a very short time in one of our public museums, or on the road as a show."

With his reference to "spry young fellows painting the Old World red," Otis is referencing the phenomenon discussed above: The "New World" Americans have persistently raided the "Old World" British for the latter's culture through the appropriation of many of Britain's more talented artists. It could be said that there was a tendency on the part of the British to 'look down their noses' at their American cousins, seeing the latter as a culturally inferior spin-off of the former. Hiram Otis is merely accentuating that perception with his comments. In other words, there is a very good chance that the American family moving into the Canterville estate will eventually return home to the United States and take the ghost with it.

This phrase is spoken by Mr Otis in Chapter One of "The Canterville Ghost." Here is its literal meaning: with all of our lively young men going out and having a great time, and bringing back some of your best actors and singers. To put this into context, Mr Otis is suggesting that the supernatural does not exist because if it did, young Americans would bring the ghosts home, just as they have brought back English singers and actors.
On a deeper level, this phrase provides evidence of the culture clash which exists between Lord Canterville and Mr Otis. Mr Otis, for example, represents the American New World, a hip and modern society, which contrasts starkly with the Old World of Lord Canterville, home to the aging English aristocracy.
For more information on this culture clash, please see the reference link provided.

Why do sports coaches make so much money?

First, we should note that not all sports coaches make a lot of money. The vast majority of people that coach even at the NCAA Division I level do not make the astronomical salaries we associate with the profession. But, to keep the answer in American college sports, the average salary among major college football coaches in 2012 was almost $1.7 million. This is more than three times the average salary of the college presidents that employ them and many times higher than the salaries of teaching faculty. Division I college basketball coaches, on the other hand, also earn massive salaries, with the highest paid coaches earning in excess of five million dollars a year. In professional athletics, coaches are generally paid even higher salaries. The highest paid NFL coaches, for example, make more than eight million dollars a year. Note that these figures do not even include additional money from product endorsements, public appearances, and other sources which in many cases actually exceed salary figures. Whether in the pros or college, the reason sports coaches make so much money is largely based on the massive stakes in winning and losing. Both college basketball and football, as well as all major professional sports, are multi-billion dollar industries, and the most successful teams bring in millions in merchandising, television rights, and other funds. So the stakes in hiring a successful coach are very high. At the college level, there is also considerable pressure from wealthy donors and fans to choose high-profile coaches. So in short, there is a very high demand for good, highly-qualified, well-known coaches, and these are in short supply. Colleges and pro teams have to compete for them, and offer exorbitant salaries to attract them. 
https://careertrend.com/much-average-division-football-coach-earn-28837.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/03/the-madness-of-college-basketball-coaches-salaries/475146/

Could you say the two women had a sort of "enlightenment" experience? How so or how not?

In Susan Glaspell's "A Jury of Her Peers," Mrs. Hale and Mrs. Peters both experience an enlightenment not only about the suspect Minnie Foster but also about themselves. When the story opens, both women bow to the dominance of their husbands. It seems that Mrs. Peters has been forced to go the "crime" scene by her husband, and Mrs. Hale—hesitant to leave her messy kitchen behind—also gives in to her husband and the sheriff when they insist that she accompanies Mrs. Peters. This opening scene with the male characters' patronizing attitude toward the two women demonstrates the typical relationship that exists between not only husbands and wives in the story's setting but also between males and females in general in the community—men run the show, and women comply, even if they do so in begrudging silence.
However, readers know from Mrs. Hale's thoughts early on that she is far from someone who will think whatever she is told to think. She carefully watches the men as they "investigate" the scene at Minnie's house. As she observes, she begins her own inventory of what might have occurred and how Minnie's husband might have died. Mrs. Peters, who is noticeably not as bold as Mrs. Hale by nature, follows Mrs. Hale's lead. Their enlightenment begins when Mrs. Hale finds Minnie's dead bird and Mrs. Peters observes that someone "wrung its neck." The narrator notes that

the eyes of the two women met—this time clung together in a look of dawning comprehension, of growing horror.

While the women don't want the men to be correct about Minnie's killing her husband, they're beginning to see that she most likely did so and, at this point, are already identifying a motive in their minds. Without much opportunity for conversation, the women begin separately and silently deciding what they will do with the evidence they have discovered. Each woman can put herself in Minnie's isolated, harsh environment and empathize with her. Each woman—without speaking to the other—comes to the conclusion that she must hide Minnie's guilt from the males. Near the story's end, when the more reticent Mrs. Peters makes her choice to participate in a "cover-up," she

turn[s] her head until her eyes [meet] the eyes of the other woman. There was a moment when they held each other in a steady, burning look in which there was no evasion or flinching.

As the men speak all their thoughts and assumptions out loud, the women silently side with Minnie and find that in doing so, they are staging their own form of independence from their male-dominated society—an independence which involves the realization that justice doesn't mean kowtowing to the men in their lives and abandoning one of their "peers."

What are some of the problems you see in prosecuting cyber-crime or -terrorism cases? Where, exactly, is "cyberspace?" How does a detective with your city’s police department have jurisdiction over the crime? Better yet, how does the detective get jurisdiction over the criminal even if he or she can be located? Or does the detective have to turn the case over to the FBI? Scotland Yard? Interpol? What if what you want to prosecute is not against the law where the person is located? Are there specific laws in your state that deal with cyber-crime? What are some examples of cyber-crime? Is this like lassoing a cloud?

The legal definition of cyber space is the same as the internet, according to Duhaime's Law Dictionary. Cyber space is a decentralized communications network. According to the Department of Justice document Prosecuting Computer Crimes (see the link below), the jurisdiction of a cyber crime is often determined to be at the federal level because it involves interstate commerce. As the report states, 


In the context of computer crime, the inexorable connection between the Internet and interstate commerce may sometimes be sufficient to satisfy the jurisdictional element of the statute at issue.

This means that if a detective uncovers a cyber crime or cyber terrorism, the case might have to be handed over to a federal entity, such as the FBI. Usually, if a computer used in the crime connects to the internet, that is sufficient grounds to substantiate that the case has interstate connections. In addition, the Patriot Act stated that acts that would constitute crimes in the jurisdiction of the U.S. can be prosecuted even if they are committed in foreign countries. That means prosecuting cyber crimes is not just like lassoing a cloud, as there are rules about jurisdiction that apply to these crimes.
Different states have different laws regarding cyber crime. For more information, see the state laws link below. Most state laws prohibit computer crimes, and different states require intentionality, meaning the crime is committed by intent. For example, in Massachusetts, computer crimes must be committed by intent. While states differ with regard to laws about cyber crimes, these crimes can be prosecuted under several different state laws or federal laws. Therefore, even if an act is not a crime in the state in which it was committed, it can be prosecuted in another state if the act is a crime in that state, or it may be prosecuted under federal law. Examples of cyber crimes include identity theft and hacking. 
With regard to prosecuting these cases, the defendant generally must be tried in the state and district where the crime was committed. Still, even the Department of Justice report states, "applying the principles of venue to network crimes is not always a straightforward endeavor" (page 117). This is the problem in prosecuting cyber crime. The critical way to determine venue is to figure out where the crime was committed. For example, the report gives the example of a cyber crime case that began in California and used a router based in Arizona to break into a network in Illinois to get information in Kentucky. In this case, the prosecution could use the endpoints—California and Kentucky—or the states in the middle, as the venue for prosecuting the case, as venue can be “in any district in which [a continuing] offense was begun, continued, or completed" (page 118). To make a case for the venue being where the information passed through, the prosecutors should determine if the communications formed the offense. These are some of the considerations that go into determining if a specific detective has jurisdiction over a case.
https://statelaws.findlaw.com/criminal-laws/computer-crimes.html

https://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/crime-penalties/federal/computer-crimes.htm

https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/criminal-ccips/legacy/2015/01/14/ccmanual.pdf