Please assist me with some pointers to get started on my essay. I am to discuss/argue the concept and use of the Byronic Hero in Wuthering Heights.

First of all, you need to establish what a Byronic hero is. Usually, a Byronic hero is defined as a deeply flawed character, isolated from society, a true individual unconstrained by any human laws or conventions. In relation to Wuthering Heights you're naturally going to be looking at the character of Heathcliff. He is generally thought by most critics and scholars to be a prime example of the Byronic hero. At the same time, it's important to recognize just how closely Heathcliff's identity is bound up with Catherine's. So in that sense there is a subtle difference between Heathcliff and other Byronic heroes such as Manfred; he is isolated but not completely.
In fact, you could reasonably argue that Catherine is also a Byronic hero to a certain extent. She, like Heathcliff, goes against established traditions and conventions. In writing your essay you may want to explore the possibility of treating Heathcliff and Catherine as two parts of a heroic Byronic whole. In particular, you might like to examine the similarities between the two characters and then set out to provide examples from the text that support your argument.
Good luck with your essay.

I need help choosing a topic for a paper related to law and literature.

Thank you for your guidance.
The topic of writing about the ethical aspects of law and how literature captures the emotional aspects of law and provides insight into the human condition is very interesting to me.  My paper's length is to be 25 pages.  I have already read Kafka's "The Trial".  I found "The Trial" to be a somewhat difficult read, where Kafka depicts a lack of legal/justice system.
Can you suggest other more modern readings that would help me with these topics?
 

The theory of law in literature proposes that novelistic accounts of the law, including narratives about legal issues, offer lawyers and judges an understanding of the law that is not available only from studying the law itself. Scholars in this area such as Richard H. Weisberg believe that texts such as Kafka's The Trial and The Brothers Karamazov by Dostoyevsky allow people in the field of law to understand the emotions and experiences of others and to appreciate the social and ethical components of law. According to Weisberg, the study of literature is critical to understanding the ethical aspects of law. Your paper might focus on how a book such as The Brothers Karamazov helps the reader understand the plight of people in a legal trial. How does literature capture the emotional aspects of the law and provide insight into the human condition, particularly around issues such as guilt, innocence, equality, and hypocrisy, in a way that the law alone cannot? 

Can you provide a character sketch of Lemuel Gulliver?

Lemuel Gulliver is the protagonist of Swift's satire Gulliver's Travels. He was born in Nottinghamshire, England in approximately 1661 to a middle- or upper-middle-class family. He attended Emmanuel College at Cambridge University and was then apprenticed to a surgeon in London. Subsequently, he studied at the distinguished Dutch University of Leiden, which offered advanced courses in medicine. He had an excellent education and knew Latin, Spanish, French, Dutch, and Italian. His facility with languages is important to the plot, as it enables him to converse with the exotic new people he meets. His frequent travels and broad education suggest an intelligent and curious disposition.
He was married in 1688 to Miss Mary Burton, daughter of a prosperous London tradesman, and probably had children, although Swift does not give details about them. He seems clever and adaptable, able to handle himself in a wide range of situations, and open to new ideas. He is a prototypically cosmopolitan character who, rather than judging other societies from the narrow perspective of his own background, uses his knowledge of other cultures to see more clearly the flaws and idiosyncrasies of his own culture.

Lemuel Gulliver is the main character in Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels, and so he merits special attention when approaching the novel. For the most part, Gulliver is thoroughly normal; he seems to have a comfortable income, he works as a surgeon, and he possesses few unusual or remarkable qualities. Indeed, we get the sense that Gulliver is something of an Everyman, and that the adventures he falls into are pure coincidence (or rotten luck) and could happen to just about anyone. However, it's worth noting that the one distinctive trait Gulliver does exhibit is a particularly enthusiastic curiosity. Throughout his journeys, Gulliver imbues his narrative with in-depth, rich descriptions of all he witnesses, and so he proves himself to be a deft observer of minute detail. Additionally, Gulliver does seem to become rather eccentric by the end of the novel. Indeed, his encounter with the Houyhnhnms and the Yahoos leads him to distrust and shun most interactions with humans, and it's safe to say that this characteristic is pretty unusual. So, while Gulliver at first seems relatively unremarkable, he slowly reveals a handful of interesting, and even unusual, characteristics as the novel progresses.

Use the guide provided to follow the key elements to create a narrative about the populism of Donald Trump's plans to prevent illegal immigrants from entering the United States. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5kv6-KTXymYSHB4SWJIS3pNek0/view

According to Ganz's guide to public narrative:

Narrative is not talking “about” values; rather narrative embodies and communicates values.

Ganz, who helped guide Obama to electoral success, locates three crucial aspects of public narrative: 

[it]requires telling a new public story, or adapting an old one: a story of self, a story of us, and a story of now. A story of self communicates the values that are calling you to act. A story of us communicates values shared by those whom you hope to motivate to act. And a story of now communicates the urgent challenge to those values that demands action now.

Ganz talks about these public narratives as having plots, morals, characters, and settings: they tell a story we can participate in with our senses.
To apply that to a Donald Trump populist story about preventing illegal immigrants from entering America, you would have to create a scenario that people can see, hear, feel, and so on. The first element would be to get inside the head and heart of Donald Trump. This would be the story of self: What values and life experiences does Trump have that makes him morally object to illegal immigrants? Does he believe, for example, in fair play, and does it seem unfair to him for people to "jump the line" by coming here illegally while people going through a legal process have to wait? Does he see these illegal aliens as taking jobs from citizens who need them? Does this raise his compassion towards those who are already here? Does he identify with legal immigrants, as his wife is an immigrant, but not illegal immigrants? Does he, having lived a long life, remember a time when America was much greater and had fewer illegal aliens? What did this greater America look like? Was everything newer, brighter, and more prosperous? How could you describe this?
The second element would be the story of us: Do we share the values that Trump expresses? Are we a country of people who champion fair play and not jumping the line? Have we worked hard to get what we have, so we object to people taking it illegally? Do we appreciate our own stories of hardworking immigrant parents, grandparents and great-grandparents who made it here legally? Could you tell such a story? What could the life of a citizen who has lost a job to an illegal alien look like, sound like, smell like? Could this person have become an opioid addict from a feeling of hopelessness? Could he be living in a falling apart house, surviving on a small disability check?
The third element in this populist narrative is the story of now. Here, a leader like Trump would appeal to common people about the need to act now. Why would it be vital to act now? Is it because this problem has been left unaddressed for too long? Is it because our country can not regain its lost greatness if we do not start taking care of the people who are here legally first and stopping the flow of illegals? 
 
 

Can you list the examples of hyperbole in the importance of being earnest.

Hyperbole is one of the techniques Oscar Wilde uses most often in The Importance of Being Earnest. Hyperbole—exaggeration for effect—enables Wilde to satirize the ridiculous ideas and behaviors of the Victorian British upper class. There are many examples throughout, but I will list a few, one from each act of the play, and explain their effects.
In the play's first act, Jack visits Algernon at his house in London. It turns out Jack left his cigarette case at the house last time he visited. When Algernon reveals he has the case, Jack exclaims,

I wish to goodness you had let me know. I have been writing frantic letters to Scotland Yard about it. I was very nearly offering a large reward.

Here, Jack tells Algernon he has consulted the police to investigate his missing cigarette case. This is an obvious overreaction on Jack's part, which is made even more ridiculous when we find out he just carelessly left it behind at his friend's house. 
In act 2, Algernon meets Cecily for the first time at Jack's country home. Only minutes after meeting her, Algernon is kicked out by Jack. When Algernon has to part from Cecily, he rhapsodizes:

Cecily, ever since I first looked upon your wonderful and incomparable beauty, I have dared to love you wildly, passionately, devotedly, hopelessly.

This is exaggerated because they have just met, of course, and the adverbs Algernon uses to describe his love for a woman he just met are completely over-the-top. Algernon values style over substance, so talking in this way can substitute for true emotion or deep feeling. Cecily is equally superficial, so she is easily impressed by Algernon's rhetoric.
In act 3, when the men are about to be christened (to change their names to Ernest), Cecily asks Algernon, "To please me you are ready to face this fearful ordeal?" Calling baptism a "fearful ordeal" is a clear exaggeration. The process is simple and does not entail any physical danger. It is also hyperbolic that Cecily is so impressed by Algernon's "willingness" to go through with this "ordeal."
Hyperbole is one of the tools Wilde uses to satirize the upper class's frivolity and superficiality in The Importance of Being Earnest. His exaggerations allow the reader to see he is poking fun at the ridiculous priorities of the most privileged members of his society.

What is court testimony?

“Court testimony” refers to the statements made by witnesses and, when relevant, defendants during the course of a trial. These statements, including prepared comments and answers to questions posed by prosecutors and defense attorneys, are made under oath. As such, court testimony is legally required to be truthful. Statements made by witnesses and others under oath that are subsequently revealed to be false are labeled “perjury.” Individuals found guilty of perjury can be prosecuted for lying while under oath.
In addition to statements made on a witness stand, “court testimony” can include statements made as part of a deposition. Depositions are written and/or oral statements made outside of a courtroom as part of the legal process. Depositions, like witness statements made in court, are given under oath and, therefore, must be truthful. They are generally submitted to the court as legal documents and are considered as part of the evidence used in the trial or other legal proceeding. While they exist as part of the court documentation, they are usually only referenced in the event of a contradiction between a statement made on the witness stand and what is presented in the deposition.

Court testimony is words spoken by someone who is a witness in a legal proceeding, in court, in response to questions from an attorney for a party in the proceeding or questions from the judge. Court testimony is always given under oath, meaning that the person swears to tell the truth.  Court testimony is always taken down by a court reporter and transcribed so that it becomes part of the official record of the proceeding.  If a person is hearing impaired and uses American Sign Language, an interpreter accompanies the person so that the testimony can still be written down.  Very occasionally, when someone has died or is completely unable to be in court for a legitimate reason, a deposition (testimony taken under oath, but not in court) of that person's testimony will be admitted to the record to stand in as court testimony.  This is quite unusual, though, since court testimony is always supposed to be subject to cross-examination, and it is impossible to cross-examine a transcript. 

Explain the fear experienced by Helen Keller. How did Miss Sullivan pacify her?

One day, Helen and Miss Sullivan went walking in the woods.  They found a nice shade tree, and Miss Sullivan suggested that they eat their midday meal under it.  Helen decided to stay in the tree while Miss Sullivan brought the food for the meal back from the house.
Helen waited on a branch in the coolness of the shade for her teacher to return.  Though Helen could not see or hear the approaching thunderstorm, she did feel it coming:

Suddenly a change passed over the tree.  All the sun's warmth left the air.  I knew the sky was black, because all the heat, which meant light to me, had died out of the atmosphere (The Story of My Life, Chapter V). 

The scent of the approaching storm was something Helen could smell.  As Helen waited, clinging to the tree branch, "a nameless fear clutched at [her] heart."  Helen was fearful because she felt alone in the storm.  She could not see or hear, and therefore could not find her way home by herself.   Helen explained the fear and loneliness she felt while in the tree:

The immense, the unknown, enfolded me.  I remained still and expectant; a chilling terror crept over me.  I longed for my teacher's return; but above all things I wanted to get down from that tree.

The winds from the storms came and violently blew the tree branches around.  Helen continued to cling to her branch.  She was terrified:

A wild impulse to jump seized me, but terror held me fast.... I felt the intermittent jarring that came now and then, as if something heavy had fallen and the shock had traveled up till it reached the limb I sat on.  It worked my suspense up to the highest point, and just as I was thinking the tree and I should fall together, my teacher seized my hand and helped me down.  I clung to her, trembling with joy to feel the earth under my feet once more.

Miss Sullivan calmed Helen's fears by returning to the tree and helping her down.  With her hand in Miss Sullivan's, Helen experienced comfort.  Miss Sullivan let Helen cling to her.

Beginning Algebra With Applications, Chapter 5, 5.3, Section 5.3, Problem 52

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

$y$-intercept:


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

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

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


The $y$-intercept is $(0,-3)$


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

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

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


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







$(1, -4)$ are the coordinates of a second point on the graph.

Draw a line through $(0,-3)$ and $(1, -4)$

What problems are encountered as the animals begin to discuss the coming rebellion?

Even though the pigs explain the theory of Animalism, in which the animals will reject human ways and work together for their own benefit, the other animals have a hard time understanding or imagining any other world than the one they have always lived in. They fear they will starve without Farmer Jones to take care of them, forgetting that they are the ones who do the work of the farm. They also have trouble with the idea that they are working towards a goal they might not see come to fulfillment in their lifetimes, asking why they should care about what happens after they are dead. When the pigs tell them the revolution is inevitable, they wonder why they have to nevertheless work for it.
Molly, the white mare who has internalized human values, doesn't understand why she should have to give up such pleasures as ribbons in her mane and sugar. Moses, the raven, has a hard time abandoning his faith in SugarCandy Mountain, a place he tells the animals they will go after death, and putting it instead in the revolution.

How did United States gain conrol over Panama?

The United States gained influence in Panama as a result of the Panamanian Revolution in 1903. The US wanted to build a canal through Columbia, which controlled the land that is now Panama. They offered Columbia a deal for a strip of land to build this canal, which Columbia refused. The US was willing to pay $10 million for this strip of land and an annual rent of $250,000. The United States then helped the people of Panama revolt against Columbia in 1903.
When Panama declared its independence from Columbia, the US helped prevent Columbia from ending the revolution. The US quickly recognized Panama as an independent country,  then offered the same deal to Panama, which was accepted, and work then began on building the Panama Canal. The US had the exclusive rights to build and operate the Panama Canal. These exclusive rights lasted until December 31, 1999, when Panama took over the operation of the Panama Canal. Thus, the US gained influence in Panama as a result of its desire to build the Panama Canal.
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/panama-to-control-canal

What shocked Jonas when he viewed his father "releasing" one of the newborn twins?

Throughout the majority of the novel, Jonas did not fully understand the meaning of the term "release." In Chapter 19, the Giver makes Jonas watch footage of an infant twin being released by Jonas' father. Jonas is shocked and disturbed as he watches his father inject a lethal substance into the newborn's scalp, which immediately kills the child. Jonas' father then places the dead infant into a small carton for disposal. Upon seeing the video of the newborn's death, Jonas is disgusted, confused, and angry. He had no idea that the term, "release," was a euphemism for death. Jonas begins to cry and refuses to go home after witnessing his father kill the infant. Jonas feels betrayed by both his community and family. The Giver then explains to Jonas that even the elderly are lethally injected during their release ceremonies. The fact that individuals are killed when they are released permanently changes Jonas' perspective on his community and family. 

In The Giver (Lowry), as Jonas watches his father release one of the newborn twins, he finally comes to understand what release is, and the horror of this, seeing a newborn put to death by his own father, disposed of like trash, makes him feel "a ripping sensation inside himself, the feeling of a terrible pain clawing its way forward to emerge in a cry" (151).  Up until this point, Jonas had believed that those released went somewhere else, to live out their lives peacefully. He understands now that Rosemary, the previous Receiver, had committed suicide, rather than live with the memories she had been given.  He sees that all of the elderly who had been "sent off" with such charming ceremonies had been sent to death.  He realizes that the punishment for breaking the rules can be a death sentence.  We can almost see all the wheels turning in his brain as he grapples with this new understanding and how it fits in with his prior understanding of release. This shock and horror are a pivotal point for Jonas, who cannot bear the thought of returning home to his father, who is an executioner.  It is after this "viewing" that Jonas understands he must leave the community, so that the community will be forced to regain memory and feelings. This is going to be a struggle for them, but it is the only way they can become fully human again. 

What is the significance of the description of the littlun crying as the boys fall asleep?

The crying of the littlun shows just how much the beast has gripped the terrified imaginations of the boys on the island. Ever since one of the littluns claimed to have seen a snake-monster, the boys have become obsessed by the idea that there is a beast on the loose. And this is despite the fact that no one knows for certain whether or not such a creature even exists.
The beast, and what it represents, precipitates the eventual power struggle between Ralph and Jack. Ralph is deeply skeptical of the very idea of monsters. For one thing, he knows that if the other boys are gripped by fear, then that will undermine the rules-based, civilized order he wishes to see established on the island. Jack, on the other hand, welcomes the beast myth. He knows that keeping the other boys in fear will make it much easier for him to exert dominance and control. He also knows that fear of the beast will instinctively make the other boys turn to him for protection, even if they dislike him and disapprove of his savage methods.
In the adult world such a mentality among the general population often gives rise to dictatorships. All too often in history people give up their rights and liberties in order to secure the protection of a strong state. This is what is about to happen in microcosm in Lord of the Flies.

Who is Kikuyu?

Snow Country is a classic piece of Japanese literature, written by Yasunari Kawabata. It tells the story of an affair between a geisha named Komako and a man called Shimamura. Their relationship is complicated, and, as Komako expects, Shimamura eventually leaves her for good. 
Kikuyu was a geisha older than Komako, who, quite like Komako, fell in love with someone who ended up leaving her. One of her regular clients, a wealthy married man, had built Kikuyu a restaurant and called it Kikuruma after her. When she fell in love with another man, she turned down the opportunity of managing the restaurant. She was therefore left with nothing when the man she loved left her. Kikuyu left the area of the hot springs in shame, hoping to be able to start over somewhere else.  
This story is a part of a conversation between Komako and Shimamura that contributes to the breaking of the illusion for Shimamura that Komako is perfect and pure.

Why has Reverend Parris sent for a doctor as the play begins?

Initially, Reverend Parris acts like any concerned parent would do if one of their children were sick: he calls for a doctor. But once it becomes clear that the doctor can't treat Betty, and he suggests that there might be dark factors at work, Parris starts acting like the cynical, selfish man he really is.
He immediately seizes on the doctor's hint of possible witchcraft as an opportunity to enhance his reputation in town. He also sees Betty's illness as a chance to deflect attention from the potentially damaging repercussions of what his daughter and the other girls were up to in the forest that night. Ever the politician, Parris is all too aware that if news of Betty and her friends' strange cavortings should ever get out then this reputation will be toast. So he cunningly turns the situation to his advantage, and begins to sow the seeds of the terrible witch-craze that will soon descend upon Salem, destroying dozens of lives in its wake.

At the beginning of the play, Reverend Parris's daughter, Betty, is lying on her bed incapacitated. The local doctors have no idea what is wrong with her and cannot heal Betty. Parris sends for Doctor Griggs, who tells Susanna Walcott that he cannot help Betty. Reverend Parris is extremely worried as Abigail informs him that rumors of witchcraft are beginning to spread throughout Salem. In addition to worrying about his daughter's health, Reverend Parris is also anxious about his position and title in the community. Reverend Parris fears that the citizens of Salem will remove him from his position of authority and desperately wishes to quell the rumors of witchcraft. Before Thomas Putnam and his wife visit Betty, Reverend Parris decides to send for Reverend Hale, who is supposed to be an expert in solving issues involving witches, demons, or other spiritual enemies. Reverend Parris hopes that Hale will confirm that no spiritual matters are the cause of Betty's illness.

Select a short section from the winter chapter that identifies a particular incident of diction or style that is particularly revealing. Identify and analyze the author’s use of literacy devices. List three questions about the short passage.

The passage that most stands out for me in this chapter is this one, in which the author describes her father's face as "a study" and then proceeds to describe that study in a piece of writing dense with figurative language and allusion:

My daddy’s face is a study. Winter moves into it and presides there. His eyes become a cliff of snow threatening to avalanche; his eyebrows bend like black limbs of leafless trees. His skin takes on the pale, cheerless yellow of winter sun; for a jaw he has the edges of a snowbound field dotted with stubble; his high forehead is the frozen sweep of the Erie, hiding currents of gelid thoughts that eddy in darkness. Wolf killer turned hawk fighter, he worked night and day to keep one from the door and the other from under the windowsills. A Vulcan guarding the flames, he gives us instructions about which doors to keep closed or opened for proper distribution of heat, lays kindling by, discusses qualities of coal, and teaches us how to rake, feed, and bank the fire. And he will not unrazor his lips until spring.

The literary devices in this passage are many. Winter, which is personified, "presides" over the father's face, suggesting that it has taken up residence there. Accordingly, the various features of his face metaphorically "become," various elements connected to winter; his eyes become "a cliff of snow threatening to avalanche," and his eyebrows become "like black limbs of leafless trees" (a simile). The author uses enumeratio, the listing of multiple elements, to emphasize how fully winter has come to "preside" over her father's face, with language like "pale," "cheerless," "frozen" and "darkness" creating a semantic field of barren wintriness and giving the impression of the father as a stoic and rather cold man; even his thoughts are "gelid." We also see an extended metaphor in the fact that these thoughts are "currents" that "eddy" through his head, as if they were the frozen Erie.
It is interesting that the use of allusion in this passage juxtaposes the wintry language with the image of "Vulcan guarding the flames." While imbued with the qualities of winter, the father is also attributed the characteristics of the Greek god of fire, volcanoes, and blacksmithing. He is stoic in his own way, but he is also presented here as a guardian. This suggests a certain duality in the father—or at least that he is not entirely cold as his face might imply. He "gives . . . instructions," but he "will not unrazor his lips until spring," a final metaphor which leaves us to ponder on how winter affects this man and why it "presides" in his face for the duration of the season.
Here are some questions one could have about the passage:

Why do you think the father will not "unrazor his lips until spring"? What does this suggest about his preoccupations?


How do you think the author feels about her father—is this a fond portrait?


Why do you think the author chooses to describe her father's face in such detail?

how has Vonnegut addressed death with using irony and the constant motif, "so it goes'?

In Slaughterhouse-Five, Vonnegut seemingly confronts the subject of death with passivity and nonchalance. Because Vonnegut himself appears in the novel and centralizes Billy Pilgrim's story around an event that Vonnegut lived through, the fire-bombing of Dresden, the novel is seen as his response to World War II and the events that he witnessed, including violence and many deaths.
The catchphrase "so it goes" is the response to any death in the novel, from the death of a fly to the deaths of many humans to the destruction of the universe. It is also the motto of the Tralfamadorians, who see all of time simultaneously and know that to exist once is to exist forever. The irony of the situation, however, is that Vonnegut has chosen to write a novel in response to the events that he witnessed. And though he may say "so it goes," the novel shows that the deaths have deeply affected Vonnegut, as they have deeply affected Billy Pilgrim.

How old was Napoleon at Waterloo?

Napoleon was forty-five years old when he fought—and lost—the battle of Waterloo. The battle took place on June 18, 1815, in what is modern-day Belgium. It says a lot about Napoleon that he fought his last battle at such a relatively young age. Most generals at that time were considerably older than Napoleon. Von Blücher, for example, head of the Prussian forces at Waterloo, was seventy-three-years old.
But few generals have experienced the kind of rapid rise through the ranks enjoyed by Napoleon, whose remarkable military genius was recognized even by his most implacable enemies. His career in the French Army started at the tender age of sixteen, when he was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant in the La Fère artillery regiment. Napoleon's subsequent rise was truly meteoric, and he was eventually promoted to Brigadier General at the astonishingly young age of twenty-four. It was from this exalted position that Napoleon launched his political career in France and, subsequently, the international stage, which ultimately led to his defeat at Waterloo.

In Act V, why does the Gentlewoman refuse to repeat Lady Macbeth’s sleep talk to the Doctor?

In Act V scene i of Macbeth, the Gentlewoman, who appears to be some sort of attendant to Lady Macbeth, asks the doctor to come observe her lady's odd behavior. Lady Macbeth has been sleepwalking, performing strange acts, and saying suspicious things all while apparently unconscious that she is doing so. At the beginning of this scene, the Doctor asks the Gentlewoman to tell him what she has heard Lady Macbeth say. Here is the exchange:

DOCTOR: A great perturbation in nature, to receive at once the benefit of sleep, and do the effects of watching. In this slumbery agitation, besides her walking and other actual performances, what, at any time, have you heard her say?
GENTLEWOMAN: That, sir, which I will not report after her.
DOCTOR: You may to me, and ’tis most meet you should.
GENTLEWOMAN: Neither to you nor any one, having no witness to confirm my speech.

The Gentlewoman tells the doctor, "I will not report after her," which means she will not tell him what Lady Macbeth has said. The Doctor insists that it would be right for her to tell him the details. However, the Gentlewoman says she will not tell anyone, "having no witness to confirm my speech." She means that since she was the only one to hear what Lady Macbeth has said, she may not be believed or trusted. This may be true, but it seems there is a deeper meaning behind why the Gentlewoman may not want to reveal Lady Macbeth's words.
As we watch Lady Macbeth in this scene, we hear her say some incriminating information about herself and her husband. Some of her relevant lines are "Yet who would have thought the old man to have had so much blood in him" and "The thane of Fife had a wife: where is she now?" Since the readers know more about Lady Macbeth's and Macbeth's crimes than the two characters watching this scene, we are aware that Lady Macbeth is making reference to the murder of Duncan and then to the murders of Macduff's (Thane of Fife) family. She also references blood several times in the scene. All of these details are suspicious and reveal a guilty conscience. It is possible the Gentlewoman doesn't want to be the one who tells everyone what the Macbeths have done. As a close attendant to the queen, she would probably be violating the lady's trust and confidence.

"Look. Mr and Mrs. Johnson, your daughter was molested, and we need to get this scumbag back in prison." In the case study that begins this way (see Michael Braswell, Larry Miller, and Joycelyn Pollock. Case Studies in Criminal Justice Ethics. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press), was what Ross did right or wrong? What is the morally right thing for you (Ross's partner) to do in this situation?

Personally, I would say that this is wrong from multiple ethical perspectives, but also that there are other problems in the description of the case.
In the description of the case, it really seems as if the police are not being adequately diligent in their investigation. Given that this occurred in daylight, and that Andrews was a registered sex offender, it is probable that a neighbor might have seen something. Also, there is no mention of trying to obtain a warrant to search Andrews' house, something that might also have provided useful evidence, or to look for electronic evidence such as CCTV footage. From this perspective, Ross appears lazy. Perhaps we should assume, however, that the police have exhausted these avenues and found no further evidence.
Morally, there are several problems here. First, an hysterical child is not absolutely reliable evidence. Scientific study results are mixed, but as there are many documented cases of false memories and claims in children, planting false evidence to convict the man on the basis of the report of a single child who will not testify in court is highly unethical. We have no evidence that Andrews actually committed the crime. Just because Andrews has committed other crimes does not prove beyond reasonable doubt that he committed this one.
Next, if Andrews does get a decent lawyer and the conviction is overturned, all the conviction will have done is given the police a reputation for sloppy work and corruption, making future convictions harder to obtain. The lack of additional and obvious investigative steps suggests that Ross is, in fact, lazy and corrupt, taking illegal shortcuts rather than doing the digging needed to produce real evidence. 
Given that you now know of your partner's illegal acts, the most prudent (and moral) course may be to report him to the internal affairs office. There are several reasons for this. The first is prudential. Now that you know about his misconduct, not reporting it puts you in an awkward legal position. Next, now you know that he is willing to take this sort of shortcut, what is the probability that he will do the same again? Are you willing to be an accomplice to any illegal acts he might commit in the future? Also, what if Andrews did not commit the crime and not only did you imprison someone who had not committed a crime but this easy false conviction has allowed the real rapist to go free and continue raping children? As a police officer, your duty is to uphold the law, not to break it. 

What did the main character do in the story? How did they contribute to the conflict?

In this story, the main character (the narrator) murders the old man with whom he lives. After committing the murder, he buries the body under the floorboards. However, the narrator is taunted by the sound of the old man's beating heart and rips up the floorboards, revealing to the police what he has done.
In terms of conflict, the main character actually creates it. Because of his mental instability, the narrator convinces himself that the old man has an "evil eye" which taunts him day and night. The narrator believes that the only way to rid himself of this evil eye is to kill the old man. It is this situation which creates the story's main conflict.
Later in the story, the narrator is conflicted again when he hears the sound of the old man's beating heart. To resolve this conflict, he rips up the floorboards to reveal the body. However, in doing this, he creates a new conflict because the police now know that he is guilty of murder.

What does Jem buy with his birthday money?

The answer to this question can be found in chapter 11. For his twelfth birthday, Jem receives a lot of money. Not one to save it, he decides to take Scout to the store to buy some things together. On the way, Mrs. Dubose insults their father for defending Tom Robinson and accuses the children of skipping school, even though it is a Saturday. Jem is clearly angry, but they continue to the store anyway. There, Jem buys a steam engine toy and gets Scout a baton.
As they return home, they pass by Mrs. Dobose's house again. Jem, still clearly angry about Mrs. Dubose's verbal attack of Atticus, grabs the baton from Scout and proceeds to destroy Mrs. Dubose's camellia flowers with it. He then, to Scout's continued dismay, breaks the baton in two over his knee. When Atticus hears about this, he is very upset with his son. He makes him go over to her house to apologize and clean up her yard.

In chapter 11, Jem turns twelve years old and takes Scout to the store to spend some of his birthday money. Unfortunately, Mrs. Dubose makes several derogatory comments about Atticus on their way to the store. After Mrs. Dubose says, "Your father’s no better than the niggers and trash he works for!," Jem becomes extremely angry and turns scarlet red (Lee, 105).
At the store, Jem purchases a toy steam engine for himself and buys Scout a baton from Elmore’s. On their trip back home, Jem takes Scout's baton and destroys Mrs. Dubose's camellia bush. Jem then bends Scout's baton over his knee until it snaps in two. Scout is both shocked and appalled by her brother's actions and can do nothing except scream. Jem proceeds to yank Scout's hair and threaten her before returning home, where he awaits his punishment from Atticus.

In The Dante Club, who was murdered fourth and how?

In The Dante Club by author Matthew Pearl, there are only three murders. The attempted fourth murder is prevented when the members of the club walk in and save the victim, Dr. Manning, before the murderer can kill him. Dan Teal, a veteran who has gone mad and merged his identity with Dante's, taking it upon himself to avenge all of the writer's critics and opponents, is subsequently killed by Manning. However, this act would be considered self-defense rather than murder.
Longfellow was the first to realize that the killer was racing the club to complete the translation of the Inferno. Dr. Manning would have become the killer's fourth victim since he works as the Harvard University treasurer. This position put him on the killer's list since the university was highly critical of Dante. In an attempt to recreate one of the punishments for the damned souls in the Inferno, a theme which all the other murders follow, Teal attempts to kill Dr. Manning and Pliny Mead by burying them in ice without clothing. After fleeing the scene of the attempted fourth and fifth murders, Teal turns on The Dante Club and tries to punish them as well. Manning finds Teal holding a gun to Longfellow and kills him, bringing the story to its resolution.

Discuss the primary causes of the American decision to declare war on Great Britain in 1812.

There are a few major reasons why the United States went to war with Great Britain in 1812. At the time, France and Great Britain were already at war. Great Britain was going to great lengths to ensure that the United States did not trade with France. The British navy blockaded French ports, which was a huge blow to international commerce. Furthermore, the Royal Navy began the practice of impressing American sailors, which the United States saw as a serious violation of American sovereignty. In 1809, Congress passed the Non-Intercourse Act which prohibited all trade with France and Great Britain as long as they were at war. This brought trade with the two nations to a near standstill and was proving catastrophic to American business interests.
Furthermore, along the northwestern frontier of the United States, tensions with Native Americans were worsening. When the British forts in Canada began augmenting their garrisons with potentially hostile native parties, a fear that the British were encouraging an insurrection across the border intensified. At this point, a group in congressmen known as the War Hawks began arguing that only the removal of the British from Canada would neutralize the Native threat.
As a result of worry about a threat of British supported insurrection coming out of Canada and the continuing violations of America's maritime rights, the United States declared war on Great Britain on June 18, 1812.
http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/bib/1812/

The major reason that the United States declared war on Britain in 1812 was that the United States felt disrespected by Britain.  Britain removed American sailors through a practice called impressment.  This was considered a violation of American maritime rights.  American ships were also stopped for having contraband, and American merchants claimed that, as a neutral party, they could trade with whomever they pleased.  The United States also claimed that the presence of British forts on the Great Lakes was a violation of the Treaty of Paris (1783) and that these forts encouraged the Native Americans there to attack American settlements in the region.  There was also a small group in Congress known as the War Hawks who sought to annex Canada while Britain was fighting the Napoleonic War.  While Britain did stop impressing American sailors and ultimately removed the forts, the attempt to annex Canada ended in disaster.  

Why is Mr. Jones in a foul mood and what does he do at the Red Lion?

In chapter 2, Orwell writes that Mr. Jones had recently fallen on hard times and had become disheartened after losing a significant amount of money in a lawsuit. Mr. Jones is deeply depressed and begins drinking heavily each day of the week. Instead of maintaining his farm and taking care of the animals, Mr. Jones spends the majority of his days reclining in his Windsor chair, reading the newspaper, and drinking alcohol. Mr. Jones's men were also dishonest and idle, which only made conditions on the farm worse for the animals. On the Saturday of Midsummer's Eve, Mr. Jones got so drunk at the Red Lion that he did not return home until midday on Sunday. Instead of feeding the animals and taking care of them when he returned to Manor Farm on Sunday, Mr. Jones went immediately to bed. The starving animals could not take being neglected and mistreated any longer and rebel against Mr. Jones. The animals successfully drive Mr. Jones off the farm and establish Animal Farm.

To answer this question, take a look at chapter 4. According to the narrator, Mr. Jones spends most of his time sitting in the taproom of the Red Lion pub, complaining of the "monstrous injustice" that he has suffered because those "good-for-nothing" animals evicted him from his own property. In other words, Mr. Jones is in a foul mood because his own animals have taken away his farm. He now spends his time drowning his sorrows in the nearby pub.
Initially, the other farmers offer Mr. Jones sympathy, but they do not offer him any help. However, they are very worried that a similar rebellion might occur on their own farms. This is particularly true of Mr. Frederick and Mr. Pilkington, who own farms adjacent to Mr. Jones and who are anxious to keep their animals in line.
With Frederick and Pilkington's help, Mr. Jones attempts to recapture his farm but is once again expelled from the property, leaving the animals in total control.

Who is the main character in The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian?

The narrator of The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian is the main character. The narrator's name is Arnold Spirit, but he also goes by the nickname Junior. The reader finally discovers the narrator's name when he goes to his new school in Reardan, but before this he has been narrating in the first person without revealing his name.
The narrator introduces himself at his new school as Junior, but then he becomes flustered when the teacher calls out his full name, Arnold Spirit. In the text, it says

My full name is Arnold Spirit, Jr. But nobody calls me that. Everybody calls me Junior. Well, every other Indian calls me Junior. "My name is Junior," I said. "And my name is Arnold. It's Junior and Arnold. I'm both" (Alexie, 60).

Junior is an awkward and poor fourteen-year-old. He is thoughtful and quiet and likes to draw, read, and play basketball. He has several physical maladies, including "water on the brain" (Alexie, 1). Early in the book, Junior decides to leave the Spokane Reservation in favor of going to a better school off the reservation in the town of Reardan. The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian is Junior's story about that transition.

What are some argumentative essay topics?

I will answer your question, but first I would like to add a caveat from my perspective as an English Composition and Rhetoric instructor for first-year students at a large university: the best topic for an essay—regardless of the "genre" of that essay—is one that you are passionate about. If you locate a topic for an essay online with little regard to how you feel about that topic, you will likely struggle with the writing process. This is especially true for argumentative essays, which require you to take a strong stance and command evidence in your favor to convince your audience of something. 
Now that that has been said, let me share with you some of the argumentative essay topics that I have especially liked from previous students:
Humans are natural and historical explorers, and the benefits of renewed efforts toward space exploration transcend monetary and market value.
The path of addiction is not made by choice, and even when regarded as a social transgression, there is still no merit for the kind of compassionless legal punishment that is reflected in our current drug laws.
Our debate around the depiction of violence in film and how it should be regulated needs to shift to a focus on how to educate moviegoers to make informed decision about the materials they consume.
I would advise thinking deeply about what you really, truly care about and constructing an argument around that!

Which to Play? Travel Team Sports vs. High School Sports

The rise of travel teams is a relatively new phenomenon. Back in my day (the late 1990s), high school athletes like me did both. (For context, I played varsity basketball and softball and also played on an AAU basketball team that went to nationals.) Today, young athletes feel a huge pressure to choose one or the other and "specialize." Let us take a look at the pros and cons of each:
The Travel Team: Pros
Travel teams participate in tournaments and events that get the players exposure to college recruiters.
Travel programs often practice year-round, giving you more time to hone your skills.
Elite travel programs carry more prestige (even if they are simply named "elite").
Travel teams are often more competitive, both in league play and within the team itself.
The Travel Team: Cons
Travel sports require a great time commitment that can eat into your social life, your schoolwork, and the time spent just being a kid.
Your parents will be forced to travel far and wide if they want to see you, which may not mesh with their schedules or your siblings' needs.
Between tournament fees, gas, hotels, and food, travel sports can be expensive.
Year-round practice and extensive travel can lead to burnout.
The School Team: Pros
You can play several different sports during the school year, which is attractive to college admissions boards.
College coaches have been recruiting at high schools for decades, and they are not going to stop.
School teams often put more focus on the social and emotional development that comes from sports, like character-building, resilience, camaraderie, and self-discipline.
You may get more playing time on your high school team. Put another way, colleges cannot recruit you if you are riding your travel team's bench.
The School Team: Cons
School teams do not recruit; players are pulled from the student body, which generally means a lower overall level of talent than most travel teams.
School teams often have much less funding than travel programs, which can translate into less-skilled coaches and worse facilities and equipment.
In recent years, school teams have been seen as less prestigious, even if, as mentioned earlier, some elite travel teams are elite in name only.
When it comes down to it, there are outstanding travel programs and lackluster travel programs, just like there are outstanding school programs and lackluster school programs. The best course of action seems to revolve around your evaluation of what you want to get out of your athletic experience. Evaluate the opportunities available to you locally, and decide what type of team environment is most likely to get you where you want to be.

What words of Jesus does Daniel recall during his struggle? Would Jesus have called softness a weakness?

In chapter nine of the book, Daniel is forced to question his role in Rosh’s gang of rebels and whether Rosh really is the leader he is looking for. This happens after he comes back from an assignment in which he is required to rob a lone traveler of his “bag of gold." He does not like to rob fellow Jews, even if it is for the cause. After robbing the traveler, he stops to ensure that the man is not badly injured. He ensures that he is able to walk back home safely. All these actions show that Daniel is a kind man. He loves his fellow men, save for the Romans. His mission in life is to avenge his family members, who lost their lives at the hands of the Romans. He detests the Romans and blames them for the many misfortunes he has experienced in life. Before this incident, he thought that Rosh was the best person capable of liberating the Jews from Roman bondage. Afterward, he is forced to ask himself whether Rosh really is the leader he thought him to be. He wonders whether his goals are in alignment with those of the group of outlaws. Does Rosh really intend to save all Jews from captivity? Why then was he asking them to rob and kill fellow Jews? While struggling with these thoughts, Daniel remembers Jesus’s words: “For each one of you is precious in his sight.” He wonders whether robbing fellow Jews to support the cause is right.
Jesus would not have called Daniel’s softness a weakness like Rosh did. This is because Jesus is all kindness. While in Bethsaida, he asks the people to “be kind to each other, to love each other, for each of them is precious in the sight of God.” What Rosh calls “softness” is love for others and kindness toward other people. In chapter 21 of the book, Daniel visits Jesus at a very difficult point in his life. He has failed in his plans to fight the Romans and lost some of his dearest friends in the process. Tormented, he begs for advice from the preacher. Jesus tells him that in order to achieve the kingdom of God he must “give up his hatred,” his plans to avenge lost lives; he also tells him that “hate is the enemy, not men.” Daniel is unable to do what Jesus says. He cannot bring himself to love his enemies—the Romans who killed his dear ones. Later on, Daniel realizes that his weakness is not his “softness” but his hatred; he understands that “love is stronger than hate.”

In The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, how did Christie prevent the reader from suspecting Dr. Sheppard as the criminal?

First and foremost, Christie took the unusual step of having Dr. Sheppard function as the first person narrator of the story. We see everything through his eyes, filtered in such a way as to make himself look innocent. He becomes Hercule Poirot’s confidant, chronicling the events and even adding his own suspicions to throw the reader off even more. Because he only speaks in good terms of the victim and is a respected member of the town, as readers we instinctively trust him as well. 
In addition, Christie also used her classic technique of having other characters with motive and opportunity. At one point Poirot observes, “Everyone at this table is hiding something,” and he is right. Dr. Sheppard acknowledges, “Everyone’s eyes dropped before him, including mine.” But we still don’t understand precisely what he means until the end. Christie leads us to believe he is feeling guilty about secretly hiding Ralph Paton in a hospital.
Ralph Paton becomes a major focus of the book, with many characters (including the police) speculating about where he is and whether or not he is the murderer. He seems to have motive and opportunity. As readers we also focus on Paton, with the other characters coming in and out of focus as their secrets are revealed. The doctor seems the most innocent of all, to the reader if not to Hercule Poirot.
In the end Poirot gives the doctor a chance to make his own choice, and Sheppard chooses to commit suicide, leaving the last chapter of his narrative the explanation of all the misleading clues and omitted information within the story. As it typical with Christie, the reader is left saying, “Ah ha! So that’s what happened!” and everything seems clear.

Single Variable Calculus, Chapter 3, 3.9, Section 3.9, Problem 34

Use differentials to estimate the amount of paint needed to apply a coat of paint 0.05cm thick to hemispherical dome with diamater 50m.

Recall that the volume of the hemisphere is half of the volume of the sphere so,

$\displaystyle V = \frac{\frac{4}{3}\pi r^3}{2} = \frac{2}{3} \pi r^3$

If we take the derivative with respect to the radius, we have


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{dV}{dr} &= \frac{2\pi}{3} \frac{d}{dr} (r^3)\\
\\
\frac{dV}{dr} &= \frac{2\pi}{\cancel{3}}\left( \cancel{3}r^2 \right)\\
\\
\frac{dV}{dr} &=2 \pi r^2\\
\\
dV &= 2 \pi r^2 dr &&; \text{ recall that } d = 2r ; r = \frac{d}{2}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$

Hence,


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
dV & = 2\pi \left( \frac{50}{2} \right)^2 \left( 0.05\text{cm} \times \frac{1m}{100\text{cm}}\right)\\
\\
dV & = 1.96 m^3
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$

Therefore, the amount of paint needed is $dV = 1.96m^3$

Why is the epicenter more dangerous than the hypocenter?

The epicenter receives the highest intensity of the earthquake because it lies directly above the point of focus or the hypocenter of the earthquake. However, this might not always be the case when the magnitude of the earthquake is very high. The magnitude and other geological factors will force the impact to spread around and greatly affect areas further away from the epicenter. The areas further away might be affected more than the epicenter. Thus, an explosion at the hypocenter will generate vibrating waves that may travel directly to the epicenter and cause much damage in that area or travel in all directions and reach different parts of the earth.
The epicenter can be termed as the most dangerous area during an earthquake. However, the situation may change depending on the magnitude and other geological conditions.
https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2003/fs014-03/

https://www.kids-fun-science.com/earthquake-focus.html

What makes "The Veldt" dystopian?

"The Veldt" tells the story of the Hadley family, who live in a Happylife Home

which had cost them thirty thousand dollars with everything included. This house which clothed and fed and rocked them to sleep and played and sang and was good to them.

The house is integrated with a highly sophisticated technology which looks after every need of the individuals living there: it cooks for them, cleans for them, even brushes their teeth and ties their shoes for them. It comes equipped with a nursery for the children which scans the children's thoughts and creates holographic simulations of reality based on what the children are thinking.

[It's a] wonder of efficiency selling for an unbelievably low price. Every home should have one. Oh, occasionally they frightened you with their realism, they made you jump, gave you a scare. But most of the time they were fun for everyone.

The parents, George and Lydia Hadley, are concerned that their children, Wendy and Peter, are misusing the nursery. The children are obsessed with the place, and spend most of their time there. In the past, the nursery has projected their innocent preoccupations, e.g.,

Wonderland with Alice and the Mock Turtle, or Aladdin and his Magical Lamp, or Jack Pumpkinhead of Oz, or Dr. Doolittle, or the cow jumping over a very real-looking moon.

For the past month, however, the children have thought only of the African savanna, and populated it with eerily realistic lions and vultures. Lydia asks George to come look at the nursery because she hears screaming, and both parents find the place unsettling, even threatening. When the lions approach them, they are genuinely frightened, and run out of the room.
Lydia confesses to George that she feels unsettled by the entire house, these days; its multi-functional brilliance has made her irrelevant:

"I feel like I don’t belong here. The house is wife and mother now, and nurse for the children. Can I compete with an African veldt? Can I give a bath and clean the children as efficiently or quickly as the automatic body wash can? I cannot."

George agrees with her that perhaps they need to take a "vacation" from the house, by switching off the technology and living like ordinary people. They're worried that the children won't be happy, but they're more worried by what the nursery has indicated about their children's state of mind:

The children thought lions, and there were lions. The children thought zebras, and there were zebras. Sun—sun. Giraffes—giraffes. Death and death.

It transpires that about a month ago, when the children became fixated on Africa, George had denied them a trip to New York. The children have been "decidedly cool" with their parents since then, and Lydia wonders how they'll react to having the entire house shut down. George replies,

"They’re unbearable—let’s admit it. They come and go when they like; they treat us as if we were the children in the family. They’re spoiled and we’re spoiled."

He knows that there will be tantrums and tears, but decides that he and Lydia will weather these in the interests of the entire family. The parents have evidently borne their children's disdain for some time, but the macabre atmosphere of the nursery pushes them to try and reassert control. Unfortunately, by abdicating their responsibilities as parents and letting the Happylife Home raise their children, George and Lydia have also forfeited any kind of authority over Peter and Wendy. When George asks Peter what his fascination with Africa is, Peter and Wendy both deny having any interest in Africa, despite what the nursery displays. They go so far as to change the nursery setting to the South American rainforest to "prove" to their parents that Africa is not on their minds. This blatant deception convinces George to bring in a child psychologist to advise on what the family should do. The psychologist, David McClean, is deeply disturbed by the nursery, and advises George and Lydia not only to switch off the house, but to leave the place entirely for at least a month to "reset" the children's thoughts. George asks,

“But won’t the shock be too much for the children, shutting the room up without notice, for good?”
[McClean replies,] “I don’t want them going any deeper into this, that’s all.”

The children are furious at the thought of leaving the nursery for any length of time, and throw such a fit that George, in despair, agrees to let them have "one more minute" of nursery-time before the family leaves on vacation. The children run to the nursery and call for their parents to follow them. When George and Lydia enter the nursery, the lions attack and devour them. The children sit calmly at a picnic table nearby, unfazed by the brutal death they have just inflicted on their parents.
So why is this dystopian? A dystopia is, by definition, "an imaginary place or condition in which everything is as bad as possible." The Hadley family lives in a seemingly idyllic home, where their every need is catered to by perfectly efficient technology. This has had the unintended effect of ennervating the adults, who do not need to take any action to care for their family or themselves, while simultaneously making the children spoiled and aggressive. Used to getting everything they want as soon as they want it, Wendy and Peter are enraged when George denies them a trip to New York—far more angry than children raised in ordinary circumstances might be. They focus that rage into a homicidal fantasy of feeding their parents to lions.
All children have rages, of course, and "feel their parents are always doing things to make them suffer in one way or another." But Wendy and Peter have access to a nursery where they can craft their fantasies into highly-detailed simulations, thereby creating a kind of psychic echo-chamber for their anger. They do not have a sulk, work through it, and move on—they channel their sense of outrage into a graphic revenge-fantasy instead, and replay it over and over until it ceases to be a mere simulation and takes on a life of its own.
Bradbury seems to be saying that using technology to accomplish our ordinary responsibilities is beneficial only to a point, beyond which point it becomes dangerous. If technology becomes sufficiently advanced, it may make human relationships redundant, and if that happens, people are in danger of reverting to a very primitive state. When George first threatens to turn off the nursery, Peter cries,

“I don’t want to do anything but look and listen and smell; what else is there to do?”

A world in which all needs are catered for is a world in which no action is necessary; all that remains is for people to passively exist, indulging their emotions as they arise. There is no need for restraint because there is no limit to resources. People are sapped of willpower, and become venal and vicious. Any attempt to reassert a more normal relationship with the world, in which a person must give as well as take, may be met with violent resistance, because people brought up in a state of hyper-indulgence see that indulgence as necessary to their continued existence.
With these thoughts in mind, you can view "The Veldt" as a spiritual, political, and scientific dystopia. Science and technology continue to make life faster, more efficient, and more convenient with each new breakthrough, with the result that people do not need each other as much as they need the technology that sustains them. This may lead to social breakdown and spiritual crisis, as spouses cease to communicate, children no longer respect their parents, and everyone is "handled and massaged" to the point where their willpower atrophies. But a gift, once given, cannot be rescinded: once technology has become embedded in people's lives, once a benefit has become an "entitlement," it is impossible to undo its effects or to disentangle it from the social fabric. Attempting to do so risks ripping that fabric, and the consequences can be dire.

What actions has Monsanto taken? What are the trade-offs of these actions? Why do you think Monsanto took such actions?

According to the article, the problem Monsanto is facing is the increasing number of weeds that have developed resistance to its leading herbicide, Roundup. The success of Roundup had been based on the development of seeds resistant to Roundup. These seeds are what are called "terminator seeds". In other words, farmers cannot use seeds from this year's crop to plant another crop next year, but must by new stocks of both Roundup and genetically modified seeds every year. Thus business model has been quite profitable for Monsanto and creates high yields for farmers. There is a problem with it, though: a trade-off that can harm farmers.
As the theory of evolution and natural selection predicts, weeds adapt to become resistant to Roundup. Monsanto's solution is to simply create newer chemicals paired with newer genetically modified seeds. While this solution maintains Monsanto's profitability, it is not necessary good for anyone else. 
Farmers can use organic farming methods such as crop rotation, mulching, and mechanical tilling to deal with weeds. Although the yields are slightly lower, these methods are sustainable and keep farmers independent of reliance on large corporations. They also preserve more biological diversity. 
These are the key factors to consider when evaluating the trade-offs between Monsanto's profits and what is best for farmers and consumers over the long term. 
http://web.mit.edu/demoscience/Monsanto/about.html

https://extension.psu.edu/weed-management-in-organic-cropping-systems

College Algebra, Chapter 3, 3.1, Section 3.1, Problem 56

Determine the domain of the function $G(x) = \sqrt{x^2 - 9}$
The function is not defined when the radicand is a negative value. So,

$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
x^2 - 9 &\geq 0 && \text{Difference of squares}\\
\\
(x+3)(x-3) &\geq 0
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


The factors on the left hand side of the inequality are $x+3$ and $x-3$. These factors are zero when $x$ is $-3$ and $3$, respectively. These numbers divide the number line into intervals
$(-\infty, -3],[-3,3], [3,\infty)$
By using some points on the interval...



Thus, the domain of $G(x)$ is $(-\infty, -3]\bigcup[3,\infty)$

The work function for tungsten is 4.58 eV . Find the threshold frequency and wavelength for the photoelectric effect to occur when monochromatic electromagnetic radiation is incident on the surface of a sample of tungsten. Find the maximum kinetic energy of the electrons if the wavelength of the incident light is 200 nm .

The work function of a metal phi , the wavelength of the incident photon lambda required to eject an electron with the maximum kinetic energy K_(max) is expressed by Einsteins photoelectric equation.
K_(max)= (hc)/lambda - phi
The threshold wavelength lambda_t , or lowest energy wavelength necessary to free an electron occurs when the K_(max)=0 .
0=(hc)/lambda_t - phi
(hc)/lambda_t = phi
lambda_t=(hc)/phi=((4.136*10^-15 eV*s)(2.9998*10^8 m/s))/(4.58 eV)= 271 nm
Using the relation lambda*f=c we can now solve for the frequency.
f_t=c/lambda_t=(2.9998*10^8 m/s)/(271 *10^-9 m)=1.11*10^15 Hz
If the wavelength of the incoming photon were 200 nm, then  K_(max) can be found by:
K_(max)=E-phi=hf-phi=(hc)/lambda-phi
K_(max)=hc/(200*10^-9 m)-4.58 eV
K_(max)=0.380 eV
https://physics.info/photoelectric/

To what extent may the approaches advocated by Byram and Teaching English as an International Language be said to be different from more traditional ways of teaching culture in foreign language education?

Traditionally, teaching a foreign language asks learners to learn the target language as if they were native speakers, and this process does not account for the learner's own culture and the way in which it affects the acquisition of another language. In addition, traditional foreign language learning treats target languages as a single language associated with a single culture and a single territory (for example, French is only connected with France). In contrast, Byram's model of "intercultural communicative competence" and the method of teaching English as International Language take into account the ability of the learner to interact with people who have multiple identities and complexities to create a shared understanding. 



Byram suggests there are many facets of international cultural competence, including the following:
attitudes/affective ability to recognize the identities of others and have empathy and tolerance for others
behavior: the capacity to be flexible in one's communications
cognitive ability to understand cultures
Byram's approach asks learners to not only use cognitive means to learn a new language but also to learn behavioral and affective competencies. Byram's model, unlike more traditional models, asks learners to adopt a more flexible and critical relationship between language and culture and to develop greater intercultural competence that they can use in any new culture. In other words, what people use in learning English can be applied to their acquisition of other languages and their understanding of other cultures. 
Sources:
Byram, M. (1997). Teaching and assessing intercultural communicative competence. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.






Lai, H-Y T. (2014). Learning English as an international language: EFL learners' perceptions of cultural knowledge acquisition in the English classroom. Asian Social Science; Vol. 10, No. 1. http://doi:10.5539/ass.v10n1p1

What are the disadvantages of judge made law, relative to statute law?

There are at least two main disadvantages of judge-made law relative to statute law.  One disadvantage has to do with the legitimacy of such law while the other has more to do with pragmatic issues.
In pragmatic terms, law made by judges will not be able to touch on as many issues at as many times as statute law can.  Judges can only make law when cases come before them.  They cannot go out and change laws simply because they want to.  In addition, they cannot rewrite laws based on whatever they feel is best at a given time.  Instead, they can only rule on specific issues raised in their cases.  For example, let us look at “Obamacare.”  Judges could strike down certain portions of the law if they wanted, but they only if plaintiffs brought cases that touch on those portions of the law.  In addition, judges would not be able to replace the law with something they liked better.  They would only be able to invalidate the law as it currently stands.
In terms of legitimacy, the disadvantage of judge-made law is that it will not seem as legitimate and democratic to many people.  Many judges are not elected.  Even those who are do not interact with other judges to debate and to make laws through consensus.  This is in contrast to the legislative branch.  In this branch, all lawmakers are democratically elected and will therefore seem legitimate to the people.  In the legislature, lawmakers get together and discuss and debate ideas.  From these interactions come laws.  This process is much more likely to make people feel satisfied with the laws.  They will respect the laws more because those laws have been created by elected officials who have been able to discuss and debate them.  They will not feel that way as much about laws that have been made by, at most, a handful of judges who are often not elected.
For these reasons, laws made by judges are generally at a disadvantage compared to statute laws.

Single Variable Calculus, Chapter 5, 5.2, Section 5.2, Problem 44

Evaluate $\displaystyle \int^5_2 \left( 1 + 3x^4 \right)dx$ using properties of integrals.
Using properties of integral

$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\int^b_a [ f(x) + g(x) ] dx &= \int^b_a f(x) dx + \int^b_a g(x) dx\\
\\
\int^5_2 (1 + 3x^4) dx &= \int^5_2 1 dx + \int^5_2 3x^4 dx, \text{ then}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$

Apply $\displaystyle \int^b_a c d x = c(b-a) \text{ and } \int^b_a cf(x) dx = c \int^b_a f(x) dx$, where $c$ is any constant so we have,
$\displaystyle 1(5-2)+3 \int^5_2 x^4 dx = 3 + 3 \int^5_2 x^4 dx \qquad \Longleftarrow \text{(Equation 1)}$
Solving for $\displaystyle \int^5_2 x^4 dx$

Here we have $f(x) = x^4$, $a = 2$, $b = 5$ and

$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\Delta x &= \frac{b-a}{n}\\
\\
\Delta x &= \frac{5-2}{n}\\
\\
\Delta x &= \frac{3}{n}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
x_i &= a + i \Delta x\\
\\
x_i &= 2 + \frac{3i}{n}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


Using defintion of integral

$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\int^a_b f(x) dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n f(x_i) \Delta x\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n f\left(2+\frac{3i}{n} \right) \left( \frac{3}{n} \right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n \left( 2 + \frac{3i}{n} \right)^4 \left( \frac{3}{n} \right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n \left[ 16 +32 \left(\frac{3i}{n} \right) + 24 \left(\frac{3i}{n} \right)^2 + 8 \left(\frac{3i}{n} \right)^3 + \left( \frac{3i}{n} \right)^4 \right] \left( \frac{3}{n} \right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n \left( 16 + \frac{96i}{n} + \frac{216i^2}{n^2} + \frac{216i^3}{n^3} + \frac{81 i^4}{n^4} \right) \left( \frac{3}{n} \right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n \left( \frac{48}{n} + \frac{288 i}{n^2} + \frac{648i^2}{n^3} + \frac{648i^3}{n^4} + \frac{243 i^4}{n^5} \right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left( \frac{1}{n} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n 48 + \frac{288}{n^2} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n i + \frac{648}{n^3} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n i^2 + \frac{648}{n^4} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n i^3 + \frac{243}{n^5} \sum\limits_{i = 1}^n i^4 \right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left[ \frac{1}{\cancel{n}} (48\cancel{n}) + \frac{288}{n^2} \left( \frac{n(n+1)}{2} \right) + \frac{648}{n^3} \left( \frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)}{6} \right) + \frac{648}{n^4} \left( \frac{n(n+1)}{2} \right)^2 + \frac{243}{n^5} \left( \frac{n(n+1)(2n+1)(3n^2+3n-1)}{3} \right) \right]\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left[ 48 + \frac{144(n+1)}{n} + \frac{108(n+1)(2n+1)}{n^2} + \frac{162(n+1)^2}{n^2} + \frac{81(n+1)(2n+1)(3n^2+3n-1)}{n^4} \right]\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left[ 48 + \frac{144n+144}{n} + \frac{108(2n^2+3n+1)}{n^2} + \frac{162(n^2+2n+1)}{n^2} + \frac{81(2n^2+3n+1)(3n^2+3n-1)}{n^4} \right]\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left[ 48 + \frac{144n+144}{n} + \frac{216n^2+324n+108+162n^2+324n+162}{n^2} + \frac{81\left( 6n^4 + 6n^3 - 2n^2 + 9n^3 + 9n^2 - \cancel{3n} + 3n^2 + \cancel{3n} - 1 \right)}{n^4}\right]\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left[ 48 + \frac{144n+144}{n} + \frac{378 n^2 + 648n + 170}{n^2} + \frac{81\left(6n^4 +15n + 10n^2 -1\right)}{n^4}\right]\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left( 48 + \frac{144n+144}{n} + \frac{378n^2 + 648n + 170}{n^2}+\frac{486n^4 +1215n^3+810n^2-81}{n^4}\right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left( \frac{48n^4 + 144n^4 + 144n^3 + 378n^4 + 648n^3 + 170n^2 + 486n^4 + 1215n^3 + 810n^2 - 81}{n^4} \right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left( \frac{1056n^4 + 2007 n^3 + 980n^2 - 81}{n^4} \right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left( \frac{\frac{1056\cancel{n^4}}{\cancel{n^4}} + \frac{2007n^3}{n^4} + \frac{980n^2}{n^4} - \frac{81}{n^4}}{\frac{\cancel{n^4}}{\cancel{n^4}} } \right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= \lim_{n \to \infty} \left( 1056 + \frac{2007}{n} + \frac{980}{n^2} - \frac{81}{n^4} \right)\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= 1056 + \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{2007}{n} + \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{980}{n^2} - \lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{81}{n^4}\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= 1056 +0 +0 -0\\
\\
\int^5_2 x^4 dx &= 1056
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


Since Equation 1 is

$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
3 + 3 \int^5_2 x^4 dx &= 3+3 (1056)\\
\\
3 + 3 \int^5_2 x^4 dx &= 3 + 3168\\
\\
3 + 3 \int^5_2 x^4 dx &= 3171
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$

Visking tubing seems to be used primarily for removing sugars in aqueous solution. Would it work for removing salinity (on a lab scale) in the same way that semi permeable membranes are used for desalinating salt water on a larger scale?

I don't see why not, but it would be very inefficient. Visking tubing is really just a semi-permeable membrane, so you could certainly use it to separate extremely small ions. You see, it used to separate sugars, but it has many other uses; dialysis centers use visking tubing to purify blood for people who have lost a kidney, but you may see it used in biology classes as a representation for the cell membrane, blood vessels, and digestive system.
The ability of visking tubing to pass molecules and atoms depends on the size of the tubing pores and the size of the molecules attempting to pass through. Similar to trying to fit the large square peg through the small circular hole, large molecules, such as massive starch chains and hulking proteins, will be unable to pass through the tiny holes of semi-permeable tubing. Small molecules like water and glucose can still pass through. When salts are in solution, they break into ions, meaning that molecules like NaCl will break into both Na and Cl atoms. These atoms are more than capable of passing through holes sized for glucose.
The problem you run into is that over time the salinity inside the visking tubing would come to match the salinity outside the tubing. This would have the same effect as just dumping salt water into your water, and pulling out a sample. The salt would just disperse, and the pure water you had before would be salty as well.
In the end, your procedure would resemble fractional dilutions rather than filtering. You would have less salt in the tubing as you ran pure water over it, but your pure water would be just as contaminated.

Why does being too strict on children actually create rebellious children with behavioral problems and cause children to have shy personalities, be isolated, and have low self-esteem?

While it is designed to create rule-following children, strict parenting, research suggests, actually backfires. This result occurs because children whose parents always dictate how their kids should act do not allow their children to develop their own internal mechanisms for self-control and good behavior. Kids learn to accept limits and boundaries when these limits are lovingly enforced, and strict parenting makes kids not want to follow limits and therefore become rebellious rule beakers. Children with strict parents can also become depressed, withdrawn, and shy because they absorb the idea from their parents that they are somehow bad or flawed, rather than feeling accepted. They also have low self-esteem, as they do not believe in their own power to regulate themselves and form warm relationships with others, including their parents. 
References:
Burhans, Karen Klein, and Carol S. Dweck. “Helplessness in Early Childhood: The Role of Contingent Worth.” Child Development 66 (1995): 1719-38.
Chapman, Michael, and Carolyn Zahn-Waxler. “Young Children’s Compliance and Noncompliance in Parenting.” In Marc H. Bornstein, ed., Handbook of Parenting, vol. 4, Applied and Practical Parenting. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1995.

log_27 9 Evaluate the expression without using a calculator.

log_27 (9)
To evaluate, let this expression be equal to y.
y = log_27 (9)
Then, convert this equation to exponential form.
Take note that if a logarithmic equation is in the form
y = log_b (x)
its equivalent exponential form is
x=b^y
So converting 
y = log_27 (9)
to exponential equation, it becomes
9=27^y
To solve for the value of y, factor each side of the equation.
3^2=(3^3)^y
3^2=3^(3y)
Since each side have the same base, to solve for y, consider only the exponents. So set the exponent at the left side equal to the exponent at the right side.
2=3y
And, isolate the y.
2/3=y
 
Therefore,  log _27 (9) = 2/3 .

Show that the length of one arch of the sine curve is equal to the length of one arch of the cosine curve.

There are multiple ways to solve this problem but I will just compute the arc length of sine and cosine over half a period, or one hump. The arc length formula for a function is:
L=int_a^b sqrt(1+f'(x)^2) dx
Let f(x)=cos(x) and g(x)=sin(x). Then we want to see if:
int_a^b sqrt(1+f'(x)^2) dx=int_c^d sqrt(1+g'(x)^2) dx
int_(-pi/2)^(pi/2) sqrt(1+cos(x)'^2) dx=int_0^pi sqrt(1+sin(x)'^2) dx
int_(-pi/2)^(pi/2) sqrt(1+sin(x)^2) dx=int_0^pi sqrt(1+cos(x)^2) dx
int_(-pi/2)^(pi/2) sqrt(2-cos(x)^2) dx=int_0^pi sqrt(2-sin(x)^2) dx
sqrt(2) int_(-pi/2)^(pi/2) sqrt(1-1/2 cos(x)^2) dx=sqrt(2) int_0^pi sqrt(1-1/2 sin(x)^2) dx
Use symmetry to change the bounds of integration.
2 sqrt(2) int_(0)^(pi/2) sqrt(1-1/2 cos(x)^2) dx=2 sqrt(2) int_0^(pi/2) sqrt(1-1/2 sin(x)^2) dx
We need to manipulate the left hand side (LHS) to get it into a similar form as the right hand side. Make a dummie variable u-substitution and then use a trigonometric identity:x=pi/2-u, dx=-du
LHS: 2 sqrt(2) int_(0)^(pi/2) sqrt(1-1/2 cos(pi/2-u)^2) (-du)= -2 sqrt(2) int_(0)^(pi/2) sqrt(1-1/2 sin(u)^2) du
Change bounds of of integration to be in terms of u so we can drop the dummie variable.
LHS: -2 sqrt(2) int_(pi/2)^(0) sqrt(1-1/2 sin(u)^2) du=2 sqrt(2) int_(0)^(pi/2) sqrt(1-1/2 sin(u)^2)
Therefore,
LHS=RHS
2 sqrt(2) int_(0)^(pi/2) sqrt(1-1/2 sin(u)^2)=2 sqrt(2) int_(0)^(pi/2) sqrt(1-1/2 sin(u)^2)
This is an elliptic integral of the second kind with the form:
E(phi,k)=int_0^phi sqrt(1-k^2 sin(theta)^2) d(theta), 0Where in this case E(phi,k)=E(pi/2,1/2)
This needs to be evaluated numerically but you will find that both sides are equal to:
2 sqrt(2) E(pi/2,1/2)~~3.8202
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/EllipticIntegraloftheSecondKind.html

Calculus of a Single Variable, Chapter 6, 6.4, Section 6.4, Problem 19

Given y'+ytanx=secx+cosx
when the first order linear ordinary Differentian equation has the form of
y'+p(x)y=q(x)
then the general solution is ,
y(x)=((int e^(int p(x) dx) *q(x)) dx +c)/ e^(int p(x) dx)
so,
y'+ytanx=secx+cosx--------(1)
y'+p(x)y=q(x)---------(2)
on comparing both we get,
p(x) = tanx and q(x)=secx +cosx
so on solving with the above general solution we get:
y(x)=((int e^(int p(x) dx) *q(x)) dx +c)/e^(int p(x) dx)
=((int e^(int (tanx) dx) *(secx+cosx)) dx +c)/e^(int tanx dx)
first we shall solve
e^(int (tanx) dx)=e^(ln(secx))= secx
so proceeding further, we get
y(x) =((int e^(int (tanx) dx) *(secx+cosx)) dx +c)/e^(int tanx dx)
=((int secx *(secx+cosx)) dx +c)/(secx )
=((int (sec^2 x+cosxsecx)) dx +c)/(secx )
= ((int (sec^2 x)dx +int 1 dx) +c)/secx
= (tanx+x +c)/secx
= sinx +(x+c)/secx
y(x) = sinx +(x+c)/secx


to find the particular solution of the differential equation we have y(0)=1

on substituting x=0 we get y=1 and so we can find the value of the c
y(0)= sin0+(0+c)/sec0 =0+0+c/1 = c
but y(0)=1
=> 1=c
=> c=1
so y=sinx+(x+1)/secx

In your opinion, what view of youth and old age does Beowulf convey? In answering, consider not only the details in the last part of the poem but also the earlier portrayals of Beowulf and Hrothgar.

Neither youth nor age is demonized in Beowulf. Both are presented as periods with their strengths and weaknesses.
The youthful Beowulf is energetic and proud. He wants to show off his physical prowess and become a hero. He boasts a little, but his actions show he is as strong as he claims to be.
During the first two-thirds of the poem, King Hrothgar is the representative of old age. He acts as a father figure to the young Beowulf. He is not physically strong and so cannot protect his people against monsters on his own as Beowulf does, but he is wiser, advising Beowulf against ignoring the higher spiritual treasures of heaven and taking all the credit for his abilities for himself without giving thanks to God.
In the final third of the poem, Beowulf has become an old man, yet he is not robbed of his dignity. He is not as powerful as he once was and even dies in battle, but he is wiser and more responsible, now acting as a king to his people. He also becomes a father figure to a young warrior named Wiglaf. This echo of the Beowulf/Hrothgar dynamic in the earlier parts of the story shows how youth and old age are parts of a cycle, neither necessarily better than the other, but natural parts of life.

At the beginning of Beowulf, Hrothgar is portrayed as a generous and benevolent king who does a great deal for his people, such as building them the splendid mead-hall, Heorot, in which to feast. However, although he was a fearsome warrior in his youth, his age means that he cannot offer the one thing the Danes need above all else: protection from Grendel. For this, he has to call upon the young hero, Beowulf.
Fifty years later, Beowulf does not make the same mistake. When he can no longer protect his people, he dies in combat, passing on the crown to Wiglaf, the only one of the Geats who distinguished himself in the battle with the dragon and managed to survive it.
The poem depicts a primitive society in which a leader needs to be able to defend himself and his people. Once he is too old to do this, whatever his other qualities, he has outlived his usefulness in a perpetually dangerous world where youth, strength, and heroism are in constant demand.

In Beowulf, youth and age are not treated very differently from the way we treat them in the contemporary West. Youth is a time of learning, characterized by seeking adventure and having to prove oneself through accomplishments. Old age is associated with wisdom, and leadership goes to those who have proven themselves through time.
This can be seen clearly by comparing the characters of Beowulf and Hrothgar at the beginning of the poem. Hrothgar is a well-respected and loved leader who has ruled the Danes effectively and successfully. His age, and the experience that comes with it, have brought power and honor to him.
A few other details hint at the respect given to the old. The poem begins with a call out to the ancient kings, describing some of Hrothgar's ancestral line, which gives honor to those old kings. Beowulf, in another demonstration of the social status of the elderly, is told by the "old men" or "wise men" (depending on the translation) that he should go across the sea to help the Danes. The old are the source of wisdom and knowledge.
Beowulf is a much younger man than Hrothgar, and as a younger man his actions are more geared toward building and maintaining a reputation as a great warrior. Beowulf listens to the advice of the elderly wise of his people, and he chooses acts of bravery that will prove his strength and courage.
Finally, when Beowulf has fought his final battle at the end of the epic, the concept of youth as a proving ground is reiterated when he hands the throne over to Wiglaf, the only Geat who stood by him while he fought the dragon. Wiglaf has proven himself, and Beowulf, now a wise old man, has chosen the most worthy man to be his successor.

What other work has been done by scientists to describe the energy that different particles have in a reaction and how have they displayed this?

Most of the recent understandings of particle reactions (and their energy levels) come as a result of experiments using particle accelerators. There are about 30,000 of these devices in use worldwide, but the ones that produce valuable new data in the field of high-energy physics are not as numerous. They include the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN in Europe and the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) at Brookhaven Laboratory in New York (Long Island).
These devices produce incredibly high energy collisions—in the future there is even concern that these collisions could produce a black hole. Superstring theory, the current dominant model in theoretical physics, suggests this is a possibility. Most of the energy produced in these collisions is displayed, like most other scientific information, as graphs.
Many of these collisions are also displayed as particle traces. These traces chart the energy levels and nature of various particles in a given collision. They can be quite beautiful.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_accelerator

https://newscenter.lbl.gov/2015/02/20/what-to-expect-next-from-the-lhc-worlds-largest-particle-accelerator/

How is the cousin is presented in the book The Vendor of Sweets?

In The Vendor of Sweets, the unemployed cousin is presented as a bit of a economically unambitious individual who contributes positively to the lives of the other characters through his emotional labor and emotional intelligence. The cousin could easily be written off as unhelpful or a mooch because of his status as an unemployed person if someone only judges someone in terms of their value as a source of capitalist production and economic labor. However, the cousin excels as providing emotional support and uses active listening skills to provide thoughtful advice and insight to Jagan. The cousin is a character who brings insight, emotional intelligence, and nuanced perspective to the novel. The cousin is a character who can push readers to respect the skills, contributions, and insights of someone who contributes to his community and people in his life outside of an economic framework.

The cousin is presented as quite a complex character in some respects. He comes across as a bit of a drifter, someone without a job or any obvious means of support; he is something of a social parasite, shamelessly sponging off other people. When he goes to visit Jagan at the sweet shop every afternoon, he always helps himself to some sweets without permission. Respecting other people's property hardly seems one of his strong points.
But Jagan knows about this and tolerates the cousin's behavior. Whatever his shortcomings in other respects, the cousin proves to be a very good listener, patiently sitting with Jagan as he regales him with his various travails, most of which revolve around his errant wastrel of a son, Mali.
The cousin also seems remarkably wise, someone who is good at giving advice. He provides a kind of bridge between the generations, between father and son, giving a much-needed detached perspective on things. Such a viewpoint is not only valuable to Jagan but also to us as readers. Thanks to the cousin's patient listening and sage advice, we develop a greater degree of empathy and understanding of the main characters in the story.

Single Variable Calculus, Chapter 3, 3.2, Section 3.2, Problem 3

Below are the graphs of functions and its derivatives. Match each function with the graph of its
derivatives and give reasons to your choices.









Graph(a) matches Figure II because graph(a) is symmetric to the origin so the graph of its derivative
is symmetric to the $y$-axis. Also, graph(a) has a maximum positive slope at $x=0$. So the graph of its
derivative has a maximum value at $x=0$.



Graph(b) matches Figure IV because graph(b) is symmetric to the origin, so the graph of its derivative is symmetric
to the $y$-axis. Also, graph(b) have points where the function is not differentiable so the graph of its derivative
has discontinuity.



Graph(c) matches Figure I because graph(c) is symmetric about the $y$-axis, so the graph of its derivative is symmetric
to the origin. Also, graph(c) has a horizontal tangent at $x=0$ that makes the derivative zero at $x=0$. Lastly the
derivative is positive when graph(c) is increasing and the derivative is negative when graph(c) is decreasing.



Graph(d) matches Figure III because graph(d) is symmetric about the $y$-axis, so the graph of its derivative is symmetric
to the origin. Also, graph(d) has horizontal tangent at $x=0$ that makes the derivative 0 at $x=0$. Lastly, the function has
three critical points where its concavity changes, thus the graph of the derivatives has three zeros.

What is the basic contrast between the past and present of Ulysses' life in "Ulysses" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson?

Essentially, the main contrast between Ulysses' past and present is that, in his past, the king was a mighty warrior and adventurer, while, in his present, he is an aged statesman bored with his idle existence and unhappy with the companionship of his family and subjects. One of the major points of Tennyson's "Ulysses" is to describe this contrast, and it quickly becomes very clear that Ulysses glorifies his legendary past while regarding his present situation with distaste. For instance, take a look at how Ulysses describes his past exploits:

Much have I seen and known; cities of men 
And manners, climates, councils, governments, 
Myself not least, but honour'd of them all; 
And drunk delight of battle with my peers, 
Far on the ringing plains of windy Troy. (13-17)

From this description, it's obvious that Ulysses' past was filled with adventure, epic warfare, and great deeds worthy of legendary heroes. To contrast this thrilling description, take a look at how Ulysses describes his present:


It little profits that an idle king, 
By this still hearth, among these barren crags, 
Match'd with an aged wife, I mete and dole 
Unequal laws unto a savage race, 
That hoard, and sleep, and feed, and know not me. (1-5)



It's clear that Ulysses regards his present life as boring, meaningless, and lacking in passion, and this dull assessment is emphasized by the king's sentimental assessment of his heroic past.
 
All in all, the main contrast here is that, in the past, Ulysses was a mighty warrior capable of great deeds, but he is now reduced to an old man who feels confined by his duties and his age. Thus, this poem is really about the aging process and how an elderly individual deals with the inability to live the life he enjoyed in his youth. By presenting this process in the legendary context of Ulysses and The Odyssey, Tennyson dramatically highlights its inherent difficulty. 
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45392/ulysses

What does Miss Maudie think about the people of Maycomb, and is she correct in her assertions?

Miss Maudie is presented as one of the more sympathetic characters in To Kill a Mockingbird. She's a very friendly, laid-back woman with a fine wit and a good sense of humor. She's also acutely aware of the myriad social hypocrisies and injustices that disfigure everyday life in Maycomb.
Yet she still retains a firm belief that most of the townsfolk are basically good people. In that sense, she's like Atticus, with whom she shares a number of character traits. After Tom Robinson's unjust conviction, Jem tells Miss Maudie that he used to think that people in Maycomb were the best in the world, but now he no longer believes that. But Miss Maudie takes a more nuanced view. She's equally disillusioned by the outcome of the trial, but she still thinks that some progress had been made in making the townsfolk at least stop and think about the issues surrounding the case. As Miss Maudie's observations are related to what may or may not happen in the future—whether racial attitudes in Maycomb will actually change—her evaluation of the townsfolk has still yet to be validated.

Calculus: Early Transcendentals, Chapter 6, 6.2, Section 6.2, Problem 5

You need to evaluate the volume of the solid obtained by the rotation of the region bounded by the curves x = 2sqrt y, x =0 , the line y = 9, about y 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 next endpoint, since one of them, y = 9 is given. The other endpoint can be evaluated by solving the following equation:
2sqrt y = 0 => 4y = 0 => y = 0
You may evaluate the volume
V = pi*int_0^9 ((2sqrt y)^2)dy
V = pi*int_0^9 (4y)dy
V = 4pi*y^2/2|_0^9
V = 2pi*y^2|_0^9
V = 2pi*(9^2 - 0^2)
V = 2pi*(81)
V = 162pi
Hence, evaluating the volume of the solid obtained by the rotation of the region bounded by the curves x = 2sqrt y, x =0 , the line y = 9, about y axis, yields V = 162pi .

College Algebra, Chapter 1, 1.6, Section 1.6, Problem 66

Solve the nonlinear inequality $\displaystyle \frac{3}{x-1} - \frac{4}{x} \geq 1 $. Express the solution using interval notation and graph the solution set.

$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{3}{x-1} - \frac{4}{x} \geq 1\\
\\
\frac{3}{x-1} - \frac{4}{x} - 1 & \geq 0 && \text{Subtract } 1\\
\\
\frac{3x-4(x-1)-x(x-1)}{x(x-1)} & \geq 0 && \text{Multiply LCD } x(x-1)\\
\\
\frac{3x-4x+4-x^2+x}{x(x-1)} & \geq 0 && \text{Simplify the numerator}\\
\\
\frac{-x^2+4}{x(x-1)} & \geq 0&& \text{Factor out negative } 1\\
\\
\frac{-(x^2-4)}{x(x-1)} & \geq 0 && \text{Divide by } -1 \\
\\
\frac{x^2 - 4}{x(x-1)} & \leq 0 && \text{Difference of squares}\\
\\
\frac{(x+2)(x-2)}{x(x-1)} & \leq 0

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


The factors on the left hand side are $x$, $x+2$, $x-2$ and $x-1$. These factors are zero when $x$ is 0,-2,2 and 1 respectively. These numbers divide the real line into intervals
$(-\infty, -2], (-2,0), (0,1),(1,2),[2,\infty)$




From the diagram, the solution of the inequality $\displaystyle \frac{(x+2)(x-2)}{x(x-1)} \leq 0$ are
$[-2,0) \bigcup (1,2]$

How does the narrator present Vera in The Open Window?

At first, Vera's presented as a rather sweet, demure young lady. This is important because it helps to lull Framton Nuttel into a false sense of security, making Vera's subsequent prank all the more effective. Yet there are subtle hints as to what kind of person Vera really is right from the very first lines of the story:

"My aunt will be down presently, Mr. Nuttel," said a very self-possessed young lady of fifteen; "in the meantime you must try and put up with me."

We see that Vera is self-possessed, very sure of herself. Yet at the same time she acts in a self-deprecating manner, which makes it easier for her to play her cruel trick on Framton. It's all an act, but then Vera needs to be a good actress if she's going to make her horror story sound plausible. And so it goes on. After Vera has finished relating her story to an increasingly agitated Framton, she breaks off with a shudder. One gets the impression she's done this before, and is getting rather good at putting on the appropriate gestures. That shudder seems almost second nature to her.
When the three men return home from their day of hunting, Vera affects a look of sheer horror. It's not enough that she has to know how to tell a good yarn; she needs to keep up the pretence for the prank to have the maximum effect. And it does.
After a terrified Framton suddenly takes off, Vera effortlessly slips back into her role as a sweet young lady, seemingly perplexed by all the hullabaloo:

"I expect it was the spaniel," said the niece calmly; "he told me he had a horror of dogs..."

Though she may have fooled Framton and her aunt, we now know what kind of person she is:

"Romance at short notice was her speciality."

So she has indeed done this kind of thing before. Just as we suspected. That explains why she's so incredibly good at it. But the last line in the story is fascinating because it makes us wonder just how far Vera's prepared to take her penchant for telling tall stories. Is it just a harmless phase of young adulthood or does it express something more sinister about Vera's personality? We must make up our own minds.

How are Jo and Laurie alike in their behaviour when it comes to gender norms? How does Laurie protest against male stereotypes in the same way that Jo is protesting female stereotypes?

Jo and Laurie are alike in terms of the way neither one really embodies the qualities typically associated with their own gender. Jo is bookish and headstrong; she hates getting dressed up, and she envies the men who go away to the war as well as Laurie when he gets to go away to school. She is quite prideful rather than submissive, even refusing to ask Aunt March for money when Marmee needs it. Instead, she sells her own hair, wearing it short (like a boy's) until it grows out again.
Laurie prefers music to study; he is sentimental and romantic. Jo is more logical than Laurie, another apparent gender reversal. For example, Jo tries to subtly prevent Laurie from proposing to her, and then, when he does, she rebuffs him. Society would dictate that Jo, a girl from a poor family, ought to jump at Laurie's offer, that she should be not only grateful but also wildly in love with him, the handsome well-to-do family friend who is so solicitous of her happiness. Then, she goes far from home to strike out on her own and become a published author (also a profession usually associated with men at that time). Even their nicknames are gender-swapped: Jo is typically a boy's nickname, and Laurie is typically a girl's.

What is the greatest sin according to Tolstoy in his novel The Death of Ivan Ilyich? What is his notion of selfhood? Contrast with Jane Austen's novel Pride and Prejudice if possible.

The greatest sin, Ivan realizes on his deathbed as his son kisses his hand, is to cause others to suffer. In great physical pain, Ivan feels a release of mental anguish as he repents of the misery he has inflicted on his family. For Tolstoy, at this stage in his life—and yet the idea is already there in Anna Karenina—selfhood emerges most fully through serving and helping others.
It would be hard to imagine two works more different than Pride and Prejudice and The Death of Ivan Ilyich. As many critics have noted, there is very little death in Austen. All of that little bit occurs off-stage, such as Mrs. Churchill's death in Emma, which is reported after the fact. There is no death in Pride and Prejudice. Of course, in contrast, death is central to Ivan Ilyich. We hear Ivan's nighttime screams of agony. We experience the dying Ivan getting relief by draping his legs over his servant's shoulders.
Austen's notion of selfhood has less to do with serving others (though Pride and Prejudice admires that trait, such as when Mr. Darcy saves Lydia) than in being true to oneself. Elizabeth Bennet has a great deal of life and selfhood in the novel because she constantly fights to maintain her integrity. For example, she won't marry to help her family, though a union with Mr. Collins would be beneficial. She won't marry Mr. Darcy when she feels belittled and degraded by him. She won't subject her will to Lady Catherine's when that woman tries to forbid her to marry Darcy. One can easily imagine that Elizabeth is not the self sacrificial woman Tolstoy would approve of.
We could say that the characters in Pride and Prejudice are living firmly and solely in the pre-death material world that also preoccupies many of the characters in Ivan Ilyich, who are more concerned with pensions and advancement than suffering or their souls. Suffering in Austen involves not finding the right husband, not having enough money to live in the style to which one is accustomed, and being insulted in the drawing room. It never gets to the contemplation of the intense existential suffering that Tolstoy examines.

In the later stages of his life and career, Tolstoy devoted himself to a form of Christian rationalism which was both a rejection of some of the attitudes expressed in his earlier work, for which he is best known, but at the same time an extension of the themes in those great books, War and Peace, and Anna Karenina.
In The Death of Ivan Ilyich,Tolstoy stresses that his protagonist's story is not in any way unusual and that it is therefore "all the more terrible." Ivan Ilyich is a basically good, decent man who lives for the material world. In this, he's no different from the vast majority of people. It is only with the onset of his illness that he begins to see a disconnect between himself, suffering with the disease that has now become the center of life, and the earthly world around him, including his wife and children. A major point made by Tolstoy is that those who are not facing imminent death generally act as if death is so remote that it has no bearing on us and that the reality of it can be safely ignored. Ivan Ilyich is suddenly plunged into a world of physical pain in which all the material values of his life—those values which all of us hold—are suddenly made irrelevant. Until this point, the spiritual world and the preparation for the next life have been of no concern to him, and until the final three days before his death, he still does not grasp that his preoccupation with the material world is the ultimate error, the ultimate sin.
One can relate this to the themes of Jane Austen's fiction, but only in the general sense that in Pride and Prejudice the issue is centered around the question of whether one should marry primarily for money, or for deeper reasons. Tolstoy's philosophy is much more radical. Both his life and work underwent a steady transformation from his youth to old age. In War and Peace and in Anna Karenina he celebrates earthly life, while at the same time being critical of the amorality of the Russian upper classes. In his own life, Tolstoy spent his youth as a ladies' man before settling down and marrying, but in later middle age he increasingly rejected the materialistic life. He wore a peasant's blouse and went to work in the fields, doing the plowing, mowing, and harvesting alongside his farm workers. He became (or tried to become) an ascetic, wishing to avoid normal marital relations with his wife. And he renounced the copyrights to his books. The literature he continued to produce became scaled-down, simplified parables with a religious message. All of this was a rejection of normal earthly existence, which he regarded as sinful. "Normal earthly existence" and the devotion to the material world, after all, is the lifestyle that Ivan Ilyich, amid the agonies of his death bed, realizes has been his ultimate error.