Write out the chemical equations that show how solid sodium hydrogen sulfite reacting with water to form an acidic solution.

Sodium hydrogen sulfite is a salt, with the sodium atom having a positive charge and the hydrogen sulfite molecule having a negative charge. Like simpler salts such as sodium chloride, this compound is soluble in water. The polar charges on the water molecules are able to arrange themselves around the cation and anion, and collectively overwhelm and isolate each molecule, surrounding them in a "shell" of water molecules. This is the first step in the reaction.
NaHSO3 → Na+ + HSO3−
At this point you might presume that the bisulfite ion (HSO3−) would strip a hydrogen from a water molecule, making itself into the sulfurous acid molecule and producing an OH−  ion. However, this produces a basic solution rather than an acidic one, and research suggests that the sulfurous acid molecule does not exist in solution anyway.
The only other option is to treat the bisulfite as an acid; its pKa is around 7, water is around 14. This means the water is more basic and therefore willing to accept a proton, which the bisulfite happens to have. This will produce a sulfur dioxide molecule with a -2 charge, and a hydronium ion, which has a very high acidity, thereby making the solution acidic.
HSO3− ⇌ SO32− + H+
H2O + H+ → H3O+
 
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/Chemical/acidbase.html

Calculus of a Single Variable, Chapter 3, 3.4, Section 3.4, Problem 6

Given: f(x)=x^5-5x+2
Find the critical values for x by setting the second derivative of the function equal to zero and solving for the x value(s).
f'(x)=5x^4-5
f''(x)=20x^3=0
x^3=0
x=0
The critical value for the second derivative is x=0.
If f''(x)>0, the curve is concave up in the interval.
If f''(x)<0, the curve is concave down in the interval.
Choose a value for x that is less than 0.
f''(-1)=-20 Since f''(-1)<0 the graph is concave down in the interval (-oo ,0).
Choose a value of x that is greater than 0.
f''(1)=20 Since f''(1)>0 the graph is concave up in the interval (0, oo).

In Three Men in a Boat, what is so comical and laughable about the trout that is encased in a glass case in Wallingford that George and J visit one day?

The trout presents an opportunity for the men to enjoy some hearty laughs. This is because each guest at the riverside inn claims to have landed the trout himself. At the end of the chapter, however, both George and J discover that the joke is on them.
When George and J enter the inn, an old man is already there, smoking a long clay pipe. He claims that he caught the monstrous trout from a river and that it weighs eighteen pounds and six ounces. Next, the local carrier stops in and claims that it was he who landed the trout five years ago. The carrier maintains that the trout weighs twenty-six pounds.
The carrier leaves, and another man comes in. This new guest claims that it was he who landed the trout early one morning. After the third guest leaves, a middle-aged man comes into the inn. This time, George asks the newcomer how he caught the trout. The man is surprised but immediately proclaims that he caught the trout in half an hour. This fourth guest says that the trout weighs in at thirty-four pounds. 
Eventually, the landlord comes in, and both men tell him what the other guests said about landing the trout. All three men have a good laugh. The landlord reveals that the previous guests were Jim Bates, Joe Muggles, Mr. Jones, and old Billy Maunders. After George, J, and the landlord have a good laugh, the landlord proclaims that it was he who caught the trout. Then, the landlord tells the story of how he actually landed the trout when he was just a boy. It seems that he only used a bit of string to land the giant fish. Eventually, the landlord is called out of the room.
George then climbs up the back of a chair to get a better view of the trout. However, he loses his balance and tries to grab on to the glass case to save himself from falling. The glass case falls down, and the trout splinters into many small fragments. Both George and J discover that the trout is actually made from plaster-of-Paris. So, the last laugh is on George and J: both fell for the stories told by the landlord and his guests.
 
 

What three specific ideas does Du Bois present in The Souls of Black Folk?

The three most unique and perpetually relevant concepts to come out of W.E.B. Du Bois's The Souls of Black Folk are the following: double-consciousness, the veil, and the color line.
The concept of "double-consciousness" is described in the first chapter, "Of Our Spiritual Strivings":

After the Egyptian and Indian, the Greek and Roman, the Teuton and Mongolian, the Negro is a sort of seventh son, born with a veil, and gifted with second-sight in this American world,--a world which yields him no true self-consciousness... It is a peculiar sensation, this double-consciousness, this sense of always looking at one's self through the eyes of others, of measuring one's soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity (Du Bois 5).

Notice how he mentions all of the "races" and cultures known to have produced great civilizations. The Negro "is a sort of seventh son," a forgotten child whose own accomplishments go ignored. He uses, too, the modern term "Negro," when "colored" was the de facto designation for black people during the time in which he writes this. He introduces the concept of the veil here as well, which I will later explain.
"Double-consciousness" is uniquely both a "second-sight," but also a state of mind which provides "no true self-consciousness." This is to say that black people have difficulty forming a self-image without being beholden by the white gaze. Black people are hyper-conscious of what white people think, worried that the bad behavior of a single individual will spoil the perception of the entire race due to the white supremacist's tendency to view all blacks with "amused contempt and pity."
Thus, one is conscious of oneself as others (i.e., whites) see him or her and, unfortunately, "measures" oneself by that conception. This consciousness places black people outside of the American mainstream, though the black American is thoroughly a product of America. The goal is to "merge" these identities, never to abandon one for the other:

He would not Africanize America, for America has too much to teach the world and Africa. He would not bleach his Negro soul in a flood of white Americanism, for he knows hat Negro blood has a message for the world. He simply wishes to be both a Negro and an American... (Du Bois 5).

The "veil," in a metaphorical sense, is a manifestation of how black people learn to see themselves as both black and American. The veil signals separation. According to Du Bois, "the veil" is what makes one "different from the others...shut out from their world..." (Du Bois 4). He had no "desire to tear down that veil," but "to creep through" (4). This means that he does not want to dismantle what makes him different -- he embraces that. However, he does not want his difference to preclude him from inclusion into all of the rights and opportunities afforded by those who are not viewed as "different."
The veil also signals that one is somehow obscured, or not clearly seen by others. This inability to be seen by others, as fully human and individual, is what results in the color line. The color line is the social result of whites viewing black people as thoroughly different -- with goals and values that are somehow separate from their own -- and as less worthy of equal recognition.
 
Source: Du Bois, W.E.B. The Souls of Black Folk. New York: Penguin Books,   1996. Print.

What is the significance of the title of the story "Araby" by James Joyce?

Its significance lies in the vision of an exotic world it conjures up for the story's young protagonist. This strange, exciting bazaar is suggestive of the mystical East, a far-off land full of romance and adventure. As with all of Joyce's stories in Dubliners, a stark contrast is drawn between the mundane, deadening state of contemporary Ireland and a more soulful, more intense, more fully human existence elsewhere.
Araby is an ideal world, as far removed from the boy's daily life as possible. This land of the imagination is mysterious, untouched, something infinitely desirable. Yet it remains nothing more than a fantasy. When the boy arrives at the bazaar only to find that it's closing down he's brought crashing back down to earth. His boyish infatuation with Mangan's sister is also exposed as an unrealizable fantasy. Araby stands for everything the boy wants but cannot have. Ideal love is precisely that, and so cannot be achieved. The boy's incipient romantic feelings are fantastical, far-off and completely out of reach—just like Araby.

James Joyce's short story "Araby" chronicles a little boy's attempt to impress a neighborhood girl, called Mangan's sister, by traveling to a local bazaar called Araby and buying her a gift. The boy (who, curiously enough, is never actually given a name), is fascinated by the exotic, as he's grown up reading books in the library of his home (a selection of tomes that includes a historical romance) and is prone to romanticizing women, a fact evidenced by his obsession with Mangan's sister.
The word and title "Araby" is an important reference to this overarching theme of the exotic. Joyce says, "the syllables of the word Araby were called to me through the silence in which my soul luxuriated and cast an Eastern enchantment over me," and so we can see that the word suggests a stereotypical vision of the "exotic Orient." Indeed, the word "Araby" itself seems to be fashioned in part by the words "Arab" or "Arabic." As such, the title "Araby" is significant because it signifies the author's childish preoccupation with an imagined, exotic realm that may exist in romantic fiction, but that does not actually exist in real life. Much of the story focuses on the narrator's discovery of this fact, and his realization that his fascination with the "exotic" has been nothing more than a boyhood fantasy. 
https://www.owleyes.org/text/araby/read/araby

file:///Users/jzachary93/Downloads/Getting%20Guns%20Off%20the%20Streets.pdf In the article "Getting Guns Off the Streets of New York" from the link on top, do you see any issues at this point that need to be addressed?

Handguns are, by definition, small and easily concealed. They are also a factor in a large percentage of crimes committed across the United States. The National Institute of Justice had this to say about the prominent role of firearms in crime in 2011:

" . . .data collected by the FBI show that firearms were used in 68 percent of murders, 41 percent of robbery offenses and 21 percent of aggravated assaults nationwide. Most homicides in the United States are committed with firearms, especially handguns."

New York is not the most violent city in America, but, as the largest city in the United States, as the center of the nation's financial industry and as perhaps the country's most important cultural center, what happens there almost always garners a great deal of attention. As with other large metropolitan areas, New York suffers from a surfeit of firearms on its streets, and those firearms are frequently used in crime, especially by gangs. Consequently, the city's elected and appointed leaders have long sought ways to reduce both the level of violence and the number of guns on its street. During previous Commissioner of Police Ray Kelly's tenure, the department carried out a controversial "stop and frisk" policy that served to both remove guns from the streets and pose a serious risk of transgressing the Constitution of the United States' protections against unwarranted search-and-seizures.
Since Ray Kelly's departure from the position of Police Commissioner, and his replacement by William Bratton, the "stop and frisk" policy has been discarded in favor of a two-track policy of establishing special courts to deal solely with gun-related crimes while also establishing a special unit within the police department dedicated to removing guns from the streets. The new policy, it is figured, will both prove more effective and be less likely to infringe civil liberties, although, given New York's history, a careful watch should be maintained on the special 200-officer force detailed to the new unit to guard against infractions.
Another component of the effort to minimize gun violence by removing firearms from the population is a commonly-used "buy back" program, in which individuals can turn in guns, no questions asked, in exchange for money. While useful, "buy back" programs are generally most successful in eliminating weapons that law-abiding citizens simply wish to get rid of for whatever reason and are happy to be paid for doing so, as is the case with guns handed down from a recently-deceased family member to another family member who has no desire to keep the guns in question.
A major problem common to all cities and towns that seek to rid their streets of guns is the porousness of borders. This has been the reason commonly given for the District of Columbia's failure to reduce gun violence: guns banned in the district are easily accessible in neighboring Virginia. Unless all states acted in consort, the task of reducing the number of guns is inordinately difficult if not impossible.
These, then, are the main issues that need to be addressed. Guns brought into New York from other regions, and the potential for the special police unit to run afoul of constitutional rights remain issues yet to be resolved.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2016/01/07/nypd-illegal-guns-carroll-dnt-ac.cnn

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/13/opinion/a-smarter-way-to-get-guns-off-the-street.html

Precalculus, Chapter 1, 1.2, Section 1.2, Problem 36

Plot the point $(4,0)$ then plot the point that is symmetric to it with respect to (a) the $x$-axis; (b) the $y$-axis; (c) the origin

a. The $x$-axis

If the point $(x,y)$ is reflected over the $x$-axis, then the image is the point $(x,-y)$. So

$(4,0) \to (4,0)$







The point has no symmetry over the $x$-axis because $y$-coordinate is .

b. The $y$-axis

If the point $(x,y)$ is reflected over the $y$-axis, then the image is the point $(-x,y)$. So

$(4,0) \to (-4,0)$







c. The origin

If the point $(x,y)$ is reflected over the origin then the image is the point $(-x,-y)$. So

$(4,0) \to (-4,0)$

How can we read Enid Blyton books using psychological approach (Freud, Jung, or Michal Woods, for instance), and how can we relate her works to her life? Also, how are racial and gender stereotypes are clear in her works?

The psychoanalytical critical approach, particularly the Freudian approach, views the output of an author as something that can be turned back on the author herself: it is considered a reflection of the author's own deeply held traumas, fears, beliefs, repressed sexuality, childhood experiences, and so on. In this kind of interpretation, while the author's intent is not really considered, the biography of the author is very important. Freudian criticism may apply the term displacement onto figures or symbols in a text, reading the author's output as if analyzing a dream. Displacement is the shift of the author's anxieties or desires onto another (fictional) person, such that this person represents the author's avatar within the texts.

You bring up the issue of gender stereotypes, and this does indeed make an excellent starting point for a Freudian critical analysis of Blyton. In Five on a Treasure Island, we meet Blyton's most famous creations: the siblings Julian, Dick and Anne, their cousin George, and Timmy, George's dog. The main character in the novel, and the most fully developed, is certainly George, who might be considered the author's avatar. George cuts her hair short and enjoys being perceived as a boy. Meanwhile, she seems to exhibit a certain amount of disdain toward her cousin Anne, who is a traditionally feminine girl who likes to wear dresses and believes she is expected to perform household duties, such as cleaning up after her brothers.
Freudian analysis would interrogate what George and her attitudes may betray about Blyton. George has been read as a queer-coded character, and it is known that Blyton had at least one lesbian affair in her lifetime. We could, then, query whether George's rejection of traditional femininity and her refusal to abide by gender stereotypes represents a repressed sexual desire on the part of the author, or at least a desire to push against and reject the confining gender stereotypes which she could not, in real life, reject.

We can advance this idea further by considering the character of Jo, who first appears in Five Fall into Adventure. Jo is presented almost as a rival for George, and at first George resents her intensely. Jo represents a stereotypical presentation of a traveler (called "gypsy" in the text, although British travelers now consider this word offensive). She is dirty, has no parental supervision to speak of, and is perceived as a boy everywhere she goes without anyone attempting to force her to be more feminine. It is evident that George is envious of Jo. Freudian criticism would here infer, then, that if George represents Blyton's displacement—the extent of what she can dream about her own wishes—Jo is a step beyond this. Jo has a certain freedom which is connected to her "otherness." Because she is a traveler, she is already outside of the bounds of society, and is completely free. She does not have to try to be seen as she wishes to be—indeed, as she truly is. Ultimately, George and Jo do become friends, but the tension between them may be seen to represent the tension between how free Blyton can imagine her gender and personal presentation being, within white middle-class society, and how free she dreams it could be without that social constraint.

Another Freudian element we could read into Blyton's novels could be applied both to the Famous Five series and to her later series, the Secret Seven, albeit to a lesser extent. The Five series has what is known as a "floating timeline." The children, we are told, are only able to meet up to go adventuring during school holidays, which are finite, and yet they never seem to get any older. Their parents are also generally absent. A Freudian reading would question whether this represents a desire in Blyton for an endless childhood, as her own was rather difficult and marked by the separation of her parents and continuous moving from house to house. As an adult, she was also married twice; in her first marriage, both she and her husband had numerous affairs. By contrast, in the world of the Five, they are perpetually children, sexless and without even the specter of parents to mar their endless summer. A Freudian interpretation might be that, because Blyton felt unable to function as an adult, she banned adults from this dreamed universe and prevented the children from ever having to become adults.

Finally, Blyton's Malory Towers series is another excellent point of reference for a Freudian criticism of her works. Various scholars have written about the presentation of Malory Towers as a dream universe in which the schoolgirls do not seem to age, and in which the girls "pair off" into couples. "Bill" Robinson is another avatar character who is a tomboy and who behaves in a gentlemanly way toward her special friend, Clarissa. A Freudian interpretation of Malory Towers might once again question whether Blyton's own unhappy married life and lesbian tendencies led her to displace her wishes into the creation of this dream universe in which there are no men and where gender can be presented in differing ways. The girls are protected by the adults who are on the distant fringes of their universe, but they are also able to perform an innocent sort of faux-lesbianism which is, within their world, "safe."
There are many other Blyton novels to discuss, given her enormous output, but I hope this serves to answer your question.

Why did the Civil War last so long?

The Civil War is unique when compared to other wars and conflicts that the United States has been involved in. I would argue two main reasons why the war lasted as long as it did.
The first reason is that the war matched old-school fighting tactics with new-age technology. Never before had soldiers been able to shoot with such accuracy and range. The minie ball, a newly invented type of bullet, wreaked havoc among injured soldiers, leaving a wake of injuries that could not be properly treated in the 1860's. As a result, many soldiers died from infection. The massive numbers of injuries and deaths caused the war to drag out as both sides were devastated by major battles.
The second reason for the length of the war has more to do with the strategies (and blunders) of the Union army. For starters, General George McClelland squandered early opportunities to capture Confederate General Robert E. Lee's Army of Northern Virginia by showing hesitancy on the battlefield. After years of fighting, the Confederacy was forced to surrender because they ran out of supplies (food, ammunition, etc.). Confederate port cities faced Union naval blockades throughout the war, which were intended to keep out the crucial supplies needed by the Confederates. While the plan ultimately worked, it proved a long and costly one.

There are many reasons why the Civil War lasted so long. First, it went on for five years, and it started Apr 12, 1861, and ended on May 13, 1865. The North could have effortlessly overwhelmed the South within weeks to months. However, this only could have happened if there had been the same number of rail lines into the district as there were in the North. The Union Army could have placed troops into most of the major Southern cities. By doing this, they could have suppressed any indications of defiance and alongside the naval blockade. If this had of occurred, the revolt would have been terminated by mid-1862 at the most recent.
Without modernization equipment and rail links, troops were compelled to walk several miles to front lines. Also, the logistics of that did not end up likely until Sherman went on his now celebrated "Walk to the Sea." Likewise, a weak military initiative on the Union side assumed a part in the matter of why the Civil War went on for so long. Case in point, The Union armed force was not put into pursuit after Gettysburg when believed that at that point could have crushed Lee's armed force shortening the war by years. Another slow demand for General Robert E. Lee, who was commander of the Confederate States Army enabled him time to delve in at Petersburg adding a very long time of trench fighting to the war. If they had of got him there sooner, they could have finished the fight ten months sooner.
Likewise, President Lincoln certainly had a hard time finding the correct general to engage the war. Then again, the south had astounding officers crushing Lincolns attempts to find a general to crush the south, while unite the union back. Gen. George Brinton McClellan, a Union soldier was magnificent at sorting out a brigade. However, when it came to fight strategies and plans, things did not turn out so well. For example, he failed to capture Lee's Army following the strategically unproductive but tactical Union victory at the Battle of Antietam outside Sharpsburg, Maryland. After that, he was never acknowledged for another field command.

The Civil War lasted from 1861-1865. Many people thought it would be a shorter conflict. One reason why the Civil War lasted four years is that the South had better military generals than the North had. Many of the military schools were located in the South, and the generals tended to fight on the side that their home state had supported. For example, Robert E. Lee, who some people regarded as the best American general at that time, stated he would fight on the side that his home state of Virginia was supporting. Since Virginia joined the Confederacy, General Lee led the Confederate army.
President Lincoln had to replace some of his generals because they weren’t effective. For example, General McClellan hesitated to move his army at times. At Antietam in September 1862, he failed to pursue the retreating General Lee, possibly costing the Union a chance to end the Civil War at that time.
Another reason why the Civil War lasted four years is that the Union had to fully conquer the South. The South only had to fight a defensive war, but the North needed to completely defeat the South in order to win the Civil War.
There also was some opposition to the Civil War in the North. The Peace Democrats wanted President Lincoln to negotiate a settlement with the Confederacy. Thus, not everybody in the North fully supported the Union’s war efforts.
There are reasons why the Civil War lasted four years.
http://www.pbs.org/kenburns/civil-war/war/war-overview/

https://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h730.html

How does Chinua Achebe use settings in Things Fall Apart?

The main setting of Things Fall Apart is a series of Igbo villages in what is now Nigeria, just before, and at the start of, British efforts to colonize and Christianize the tribes. The setting is crucial because of that historical context and because of the way the tribal values have shaped the protagonist Okonkwo. There is a key change of setting in the novel, as well, when Okonkwo is exiled to his motherland for seven years. When Okonkwo goes to his mother's village of Mbanta, he is humbled; he is no longer a tribal leader. And yet, when all he can think about and look forward to is how he will regain his status and wealth when he returns to Umuofia.
The setting of Umuofia influences Okonkwo's character, though he deviates from his cultural norms in significant ways. The tribe values ancestors and traditions. Okonkwo respects these values only to an extent. He beats one of his wives during the Peace Week, which is strictly forbidden, and he disavows his own father for being poor and not masculine enough by Okonkwo's standards (he is a musician, while Okonkwo demonstrates his manly strength through wrestling and successfully farming yams).
When Okonkwo returns from exile, he finds that the tribe has fallen under the influence of the Christians. There are some rebels, but there are also some villagers who have converted. Umuofia is a changed place, and Okonkwo's priorities are no longer shared by many of his peers or by those of younger generations. The setting shows us the flaws in Okonkwo's character and how his inability to accept change leads to his downfall. However, the setting also allows Achebe to critique the methods and attitudes of the westerners who come to Umuofia and attempt to "pacify" (209) the African tribes.

Why is King Leonidas of Sparta important now?

The answer to this question is mostly one of opinion. Not much is known about the actual King Leonidas as he exists as both a legendary and historical figure. Most of what we know about him comes from the ancient historian Herodotus, who is well known to have exaggerated facts, or even outright invented them. Leonidas, I think, is a great case study in human nature, even in a modern sense. Although ancient Sparta existed in a time and place far removed from today's world, in many ways it was surprisingly modern.
For instance, at the time of King Leonidas, Sparta ensured access to public education for all its citizens, much the way many nations do today. Sparta also had a social welfare system in which land was granted to all Spartans so that they could farm it and support themselves. Sparta also provided more autonomy to its women than any other Greek city at the time. These can all be viewed as examples of how to build a more inclusive and supportive society today.
As for King Leonidas, it is important to note his conscious self-sacrifice. He can be seen today as a hero who gave his life for the greater good of his nation. He went to war against the Persians in order to defend his home. It was not an aggressive attack, but rather a defensive action. Herodotus makes it clear that Leonidas knew he likely would not survive the Battle of Thermopylae. Herodotus writes that on the morning of the battle, Leonidas "bade his soldiers eat their breakfast as if they were to eat their dinner in the other world." Leonidas can be seen as a martyr who put his nation's survival above his own. Today's leaders can look to him as someone who rules (or in this case fights) not for his own glory, but for the greater good of the people who look up to him as a leader.
http://www.sjsu.edu/people/james.lindahl/courses/Hum1A/s3/Thermopolyaesm.pdf

https://www.ancient.eu/sparta/

How does Mr. Martin present himself to Ms. Barrows on the night of his visit to her apartment?

Mr. Martin wants to lull Mrs. Burrows into a false sense of security to make it easier for him to kill her. So, instead of acting in his usually meek and mild manner, he indulges in the kind of behavior—smoking and drinking—which is likely to endear him to the similarly inclined Mrs. Burrows. But for all Martin's determination to finish Ulgine off, he doesn't have the gumption to make it happen. Despite his man-of-the-world posture he can't make that final leap to committing murder.
It's then that Mr. Martin has a brainwave. He suddenly realizes that he can achieve his goals without going to such drastic lengths as actually murdering Mrs. Burrows. However, this new plan is similar to the old one in that it involves Mr. Martin acting completely out of character. By putting on a facade of insanity he knows that not only will Mrs. Burrows be unnerved by the experience, but that she won't hesitate to inform her husband as to what happened at the earliest opportunity. And when Ulgine does so, Mr. Martin is certain that Mr. Burrows won't believe a word she says, thus undermining her credibility.

Mr. Martin at first presents himself as a modest little man not too much different from the person he appears to be at the office, except for the fact that he smokes cigarettes and drinks liquor. This is while he is still planning to murder Ulgine Barrows. She is surprised even at this difference in his personality. But while she is out of the room mixing drinks and he is looking around for something to kill her with, he has a sudden realization that he can do something much better. When she comes back with the drinks he pretends to be borderline insane. He tells her, among other things:

"I am preparing a bomb that will blow the old goat higher than hell....I'll be coked to the gills when I bump that old buzzard off."

Mrs. Barrows indignantly orders Mr. Martin to leave. She reports his behavior to their employer Mr. Fitweiler the next morning. But she ends up losing her own job because Mr. Fitweiler believe she must be insane to think that a mousy little man like Mr. Martin could have behaved the way she describes.
 

Who wrote the United States Constitution?

Who wrote the united States Constitution

No one person wrote the United States Constitution all by himself.  We do not even know who wrote any particular section of the document.  If your instructor expects you to actually give a name, it is likely that you are supposed to give James Madison as your answer.  Madison is often called the “father of the Constitution,” but this does not mean that he actually wrote the document.
As you can see in the link below from the US government archives, no single person is credited with writing the Constitution.  People sometimes say Madison did and sometimes say that Governor Morris did.  However, experts are not convinced.  As the link says,

The actual literary form is believed to be largely that of Morris, and the chief testimony for this is in the letters and papers of Madison, and Morris's claim. However, the document in reality was built slowly and laboriously, with not a piece of material included until it had been shaped and approved. The preamble was written by the Committee of Style.

So, we have to say that no single person wrote the US Constitution.  If you do have to give a name, I would suggest that you check to see if your textbook gives an answer to the question.  If so, that is probably the name your instructor expects you to give.
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs

Single Variable Calculus, Chapter 4, 4.5, Section 4.5, Problem 56

Show that $\displaystyle \lim_{x \to \pm \infty} [f(x) -x^2 ] = 0$ if $\displaystyle f(x) = \frac{x^3 + 1}{x}$. Use this fact sketch the graph of $f$.

By using long division,







We can rewrite $f(x)$ as $\displaystyle f(x) = x^2 + \frac{1}{x}$, so..

$\displaystyle \lim_{x \to \pm \infty} [f(x) - x^2] = \frac{1}{x} = \frac{1}{\infty} = 0$

It means that the function is asymptotic to $y = x^2$

Now, using the guidelines of curve sketching

A. Domain,

The domain of the function is $(- \infty, 0) \bigcup (0, \infty)$

B. Intercepts,

Solving for $y$-intercept, when $x = 0$

$\displaystyle y = \frac{0^3 + 1}{0} = \frac{1}{0}$

$y$ intercept does not exist

Solving for $x$-intercept when $y = 0$


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

0 =& \frac{x^3 + 1}{x}
\\
\\
0 =& x^3 + 1
\\
\\
x =& -1

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


C. Symmetry,

The function is not symmetric to either $y$ axis or origin by using symmetry test

D. Asymptotes,

For vertical asymptote, we set the denominator equal to 0, that is $x = 0$.

For horizontal asymptote, since $\lim_{x \to \pm \infty} = \pm \infty$, we can say that the function has no horizontal asymptote.

E. Intervals of Increase or Decrease,

If $\displaystyle f(x) = \frac{x^3 + 1}{x}$, then by using Quotient Rule..

$\displaystyle f'(x) = \frac{x (3x^2) - (x^3 + 1)(1) }{(x)^2}= \frac{3x^3 - x^3 - 1}{x^2} = \frac{2x^3 - 1}{x^2}$

when $f'(x) = 0$,


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

0 =& 2x^3 - 1
\\
\\
x^3 =& \frac{1}{2}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


The critical number is,

$x = 0.7937$

Hence, the intervals of increase or decrease are..

$
\begin{array}{|c|c|c|}
\hline\\
\text{Interval} & f'(x) & f \\
x < 0 & - & \text{decreasing on } (- \infty, 0) \\
0 < x < 0.7937 & - & \text{decreasing on } (0, 0.7937) \\
x > 0.7937 & + & \text{increasing on } (0.7937, \infty)\\
\hline
\end{array}
$

F. Local Maximum and Minimum Values,

Since $f'(x)$ changes from negative to positive at $x = 0.7937, f(0.7937) = 1.89$ is a local minimum.

G. Concavity and Inflection Points

If $\displaystyle f'(x) = \frac{2x^3 - 1}{x^2}$, then by using Quotient Rule..


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

f''(x) =& \frac{x^2 (6x^2) - (2x^3 - 1)(2x) }{(x^2)^2}
\\
\\
f''(x) =& \frac{6x^4 - 4x^4 + 2x}{x^4} = \frac{2x^4 + 2x}{x^4} = \frac{2x (x^3 + 1)}{x^4} = \frac{2(x^3 + 1)}{x^3}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


when $f''(x) = 0$,


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

0 =& 2(x^3 + 1)
\\
\\
x^3 + 1 =& 0
\\
\\
x =& -1

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


The inflection point is at $f(-1) = 0$

Hence, the concavity is..

$
\begin{array}{|c|c|c|}
\hline\\
\text{Interval} & f''(x) & \text{Concavity} \\
x < -1 & + & \text{Upward} \\
-1 < x < 0 & - & \text{Downward} \\
x > 0 & + & \text{Upward}\\
\hline
\end{array}
$

H. Sketch the graph.

Which of Martin Luther’s disagreements with the Catholic Church do you think were most influenced by the Renaissance idea of humanism? Why?

Martin Luther had certain things in common with the humanists, but I'm not sure that I would call him humanistic in his outlook. Ultimately, the humanists' veneration of classical texts and classical writing was joined with a veneration of the classical world's sense of civic morality. When reading the likes of Cicero, they would tend to focus on his use of argumentation and rhetoric or draw on his example as a great statesman and leader. While they were still religious, the humanists tended to place a much greater focus on the current life, and one's responsibilities within a civic or social community, than the medieval scholastics, who tended to look primarily toward God, did.
That being said, both Luther and the humanists shared a common ground. First and foremost, they both shared a disdain for medieval scholasticism, which they dismissed as artificial and, in many respects, even trivial. Famously, the Protestant formulation of "Sola Scriptura" represented a dramatic break with Christian tradition, stating that theological truth could only be found within the Bible itself, not through the teachings of church tradition. As a result of this viewpoint, Luther also translated the Bible into the vernacular so that the laity could actually read the scripture and not rely solely on intermediaries such as priests. In this, also, Luther paralleled earlier humanists, like Erasmus.

The rallying cry of Renaissance humanism was "Ad fontes!" or "Back to the sources." Renaissance thinkers consciously returned to the treasures of classical learning for inspiration, seeing them as examples to be imitated in a variety of human endeavors, including everything from art and architecture to poetry and political philosophy.
Luther was himself influenced by the humanist veneration of antiquity. However, antiquity for him meant primitive Christianity and the sources he went back to were the Holy Scriptures. In his principle of sola scriptura, Luther insisted that the ultimate truth of things lay in the Bible and nowhere else. Individual Christian believers should interpret the word of God for themselves, instead of relying on the Church to do it for them.
In their privileging of pagan thought, Renaissance humanists often sought to bypass the authority of the Church; they shared with Luther a total disdain for the scholastic philosophy used to provide intellectual support for that authority. However, they still venerated human thought; for Luther, sole authority was vested in the word of God as interpreted by the individual believer.
https://owlcation.com/humanities/Martin-Luthers-Humanism-Education

Is The Aeneid a real story or the real history of Rome?

The Aeneid is mostly myth. During the Age of Augustus, Virgil was asked to create the story of Rome's founding. It is important to note that there is another story about the founding of Rome involving the brothers Romulus and Remus. Both were said to have been suckled by a wolf. Later, Romulus kills his brother. The story of Romulus and Remus is also mentioned in the Aeneid. However, the epic poem does not focus on their adventures, but merely relates how they were necessary for the fate of the future republic and empire.
Instead, the poem focuses on the adventures of Aeneas, a Trojan soldier returning home after the end of the war. The Trojan War, too, figures somewhere between myth and actual historical record. During the Bronze Age, there was conflict between Troy (which is said to have been in what is now Turkey) and the Mycenaean kingdom. 
While some aspects of the poem are probably true, others are totally mythological. For example, in Book IV of the Aeneid, one of the best-known chapters, Aeneas falls in love with the Carthaginian queen Dido, but abandons her to fulfill his fated duty of founding Rome. In her grief, she commits suicide. It is very possible that Aeneas traveled to Carthage (what would now be Libya) and fell in love with a woman, then abandoned her.
On the other hand, Aeneas is said to have been the son of the prince Anchises and the goddess Venus. This aspect of his lineage is impossible. However, connecting Aeneas to a goddess explains why he is extraordinary and why he was fated to carry out such a monumental task.

What does Prospero feel entitled to in The Tempest?

Prospero in The Tempest seems to feel that he is entitled to a lot of things. The actions that he takes to stir up the tempest and begin the action of the play are all for the purpose of taking back what he feels he deserves.
The most obvious thing that Prospero feels entitled to is the title of Duke of Milan. Years ago, Prospero was the duke. However, as he tells Miranda in act 1, scene 2:

My brother and thy uncle, called Antonio—I pray thee, mark me—that a brother shouldBe so perfidious!—he whom next thyselfOf all the world I loved, and to him putThe manage of my state, as at that timeThrough all the signories it was the first,And Prospero the prime duke, being so reputedIn dignity, and for the liberal artsWithout a parallel. Those being all my study,The government I cast upon my brotherAnd to my state grew stranger, being transportedAnd rapt in secret studies (1.2.84-95).

Prospero was the Duke of Milan by legal right, and he claims that he was renowned in Milan for his dignity and education. Prospero was interested in studying and became so wrapped up in studying that he asked his brother to manage the duchy. However, as Prospero became more and more of a "stranger" to his state, his brother took over more and more of the government until he was able to stage a coup and exile Prospero. Prospero is the legal Duke of Milan; however, he himself admits to actions that sound like he neglected the management of his state. Whether he was a good ruler or not, the state should still rightfully belong to him, and therefore he feels entitled to getting this back.

Prospero also seems to feel that he is entitled to the love, loyalty, and servitude of the inhabitants of the island. In his initial scene with Ariel, when Ariel requests his liberty, Prospero reminds him that when he first found him, Ariel was trapped in a tree trunk and had been placed there by a witch. Prospero tells him,


Thy groansDid make wolves howl, and penetrate the breastsOf ever-angry bears. It was a tormentTo lay upon the damned, which SycoraxCould not again undo. It was mine art,When I arrived and heard thee, that made gapeThe pine and let thee out (1.2.340-347).

Since Prospero freed him, he feels that he is entitled to full servitude for anything that he requires of Ariel. Prospero also extends this attitude to the monster Caliban, from whom he expects service and obedience.
https://www.folgerdigitaltexts.org/html/Tmp.html

How does Portia that she is more fond of Bassanio than the other two suitors?

Portia shows she is more fond of Bassanio than the other two suitors when she advises him to wait a day or two before making his choice of the three caskets. She says this because she wants him to choose the right one and become her spouse. As she puts it:

in choosing wrong, / I lose your company.

She doesn't say anything like this to the other two suitors, both of whom she endures rather than encourages. When they are gone, she refers to them both as "deliberate fools."
Portia shows positive emotion, however, when Bassanio picks the right casket. In her overflowing love, she wants to give him even more than the wealth she has to offer, which is considerable. She willingly gives him all that is hers, including her ring. She also gets actively involved in helping him save his friend Antonio.

In The Catcher in the Rye by Salinger, what is the illness or disorder that Holden suffers from that makes him push away from social interactions? What are three quotes that support that?

In the story, Holden appears to suffer from clinical depression; this disorder is characterized by a lack of interest in life and a tendency towards low self-esteem. You will notice that Holden talks a lot about being depressed in the short novel. He is also saddened by seemingly mundane things, another symptom of clinical depression. Sometimes, Holden is also depressed when he thinks about the kind of person he is.
In Chapter 13, he talks about being depressed because of his cowardice. He thinks that, if he had the ability to beat up someone when he felt like it, he would be less "yellow."

What you should be is not yellow at all. If you're supposed to sock somebody in the jaw, and you sort of feel like doing it, you should do it. I'm just no good at it, though...The more I thought about my gloves and my yellowness, the more depressed I got, and I decided, while I was walking and all, to stop off and have a drink somewhere.

Later in the chapter, Holden has an opportunity to sleep with a prostitute, but he can't bring himself to do the deed. Privately, he's embarrassed that he's still a virgin and thinks that, if he could be a little more assertive, he would be more successful with women. However, he argues that, since something always happens when he's on the verge of losing his virginity, it's hard not to get depressed about the whole affair. Even when the opportunity presents itself to him, he still feels awkward and unsophisticated. In this chapter, he lies to the prostitute so that he won't have to lay bare his sexual inexperience before her. He tells her that he's just had an operation on his "clavichord." A clavichord, of course, is a keyboard instrument, popular in the 15th through the 19th centuries.

The trouble was, I just didn't want to do it. I felt more depressed than sexy, if you want to know the truth. She was depressing. Her green dress hanging in the closet and all. And besides, I don't think I could ever do it with somebody that sits in a stupid movie all day long. I really don't think I could.

Notice that he makes an excuse to rationalize his inaction to himself. Basically, Holden is depressed because of his low self-esteem, due to his inability to perform what he believes are the acts of a man.
In Chapter 14, he tells us that he talks out loud to himself when he feels depressed. For example, when he remembers Allie, he remembers his part in excluding Allie from a BB game he and Bobby had planned to have. Since Allie's death, Holden has never been the same. When he gets very depressed, he remembers how Allie never made a fuss about being excluded from the BB game. In order to mitigate his feelings of sadness, he then tries imagining that he did give his brother permission, and this comforts him somewhat.

So once in a while, now, when I get very depressed, I keep saying to him, "Okay. Go home and get your bike and meet me in front of Bobby's house. Hurry up." It wasn't that I didn't use to take him with me when I went somewhere. I did. But that one day, I didn't. He didn't get sore about it--he never got sore about anything-- but I keep thinking about it anyway, when I get very depressed.

What are some examples of foreshadowing in "Once Upon a Time"?

Nadine Gordimer weaves many examples of foreshadowing into "Once Upon a Time." The frame story introduces the concept of fear. The idea of the subterranean mining tunnels that rock the narrator's house—dark, invisible, and cryptic—foreshadow the ethnic unrest that rocks the social fabric of the suburban community in the bedtime story. 
As the bedtime story begins, readers learn the family is "living happily ever after." Since such wording usually describes the end, not the beginning, of a story, readers know the happiness cannot last, or there would not be any story at all. The reference to the parents' fencing the swimming pool so the boy won't "fall in and drown" foreshadows the boy's death in his own yard. The early appearance of a "wise old witch" also portends some sort of evil curse or ill fortune. When the second paragraph of the bedtime story explains "it was not possible to insure the house. . . against riot damage," readers suspect such an event may occur. This foreshadowed event never happens; instead, it is the desire to "insure against. . . damage" that becomes the destructive force in the family's life.
The cat that keeps setting off the alarm acts as a bad omen as well. Cats and witches often portend evil, and in this case, the fact that the cat can scale the wall and get through the bars predicts that the home is not yet fully secure. The installation of the "Dragon's Teeth" fencing that makes their home look like a concentration camp, and the wife's first contradiction ("You're wrong") give a feeling of foreboding as the end of the story nears. Now the cat sleeps on the bed, yet the husband's calm assurance that "cats always look before they leap" makes readers anticipate that the cat is wiser than his human owners, and that they are leaping into danger that they haven't fully considered. 
The foreshadowing Gordimer uses helps readers stay engaged with the story as they anticipate a non-traditional ending to this "bedtime story."

The  bedtime story, contained in Once Upon a Time by Nadine Gordimer reveals the inner conflict of a misguided family which believes it is doing the best it can to protect itself. The reader feels uneasy almost from the beginning as this seemingly perfect family as a sign which reads , you have been warned , and it is intended for any would be intruders foreshadowing what will follow.
There is also talk of riots, and even though the husband reassures his wife that, there was nothing to fear, the reader is not convinced. The fact that they need , police and soldiers and tear-gas and guns., suggests that the riots are more than the husband reveals, leading the reader to conclude that this story will not end well.
The chronological order is central to the story as it intensifies the increasing extent of this family's paranoia. The more precautions it takes, the more flaws it find in its security. The alarms systems seem to mock the efforts of all the residents of the suburb because intruders sawed the iron bars., while the alarms become almost musical, soothing even and ineffective. Furthermore, the more security measures they take, the more people there are outside their property and even though the rioters may have been contained, the loafers and tsotsis become more threatening as time progresses, again foreshadowing the tragic ending.
The cat itself represents a seemingly innocuous threat to the family. It is the cat which first sets off the alarm. It is the cat whose actions, when it effortlessly scales the wall, prompt the family to find another way to protect themselves, and it is the cat which remains on the property at the end because it would not even attempt the latest security enhancements, foreshadowing the fact that the danger lies inside.
The characters that are set in opposition to each other are the peoples outside the wall and the family within. The wife does not like to see people go hungry but the husband is more inclined to listen to the wise old witch. 

Calculus of a Single Variable, Chapter 2, 2.1, Section 2.1, Problem 35

The given line is :-
3x - y + 1 = 0
or, y = 3x + 1 (the line is represented in slope intercept form)
Thus, the slope of the line = 3
Now, the tangent to the curve f(x) = (x^3) is parallel to the above line
Thus, the slope of the tangent = slope of the line = 3.......(1)
The given function is:-
f(x) = (x^2)
differentiating both sides w.r.t 'x' we get
f'(x) = 3(x^2)
Now, slope of the tangent = 3
Thus, 3(x^2) = 3
or, x = +1 or -1
Putting the value of x =1 in the given equation of curve, we get
f(1) = y = 1
Hence the tangent passes through the point (1,1)
Thus, equation of the tangent at the point (1,1) and having slope = 3 is :-
y - 1 = (3)*(x - 1)
or, y - 1 = 3x - 3
or, y - 3x + 2 = 0 is the equation of the tangent to the given curve at (1,1).........(2)

Putting x = -1 in the equation of curve we get
f(-1) = y = -1
Thus, the equation of the tangent passing through the point (-1,-1) and having slope 3 will be:-
y - (-1) = 3(x - (-1))
or, y + 1 = 3x + 3
or, y - 3x - 2 = 0

What were the three paternal gifts that young D'Artagnan received?

The three gifts that young D'artagnan receives from his father, D'artagnan the elder, are a horse, money, and a letter. The horse is old, yellow, and has no hair in its tail, which earns D'artagnan a lot of ridicule in the present time. It's because of this ridicule that D'artagnan recalls how he received the horse from his father in the past, along with his other two gifts. Following this, we then get a glimpse into D'artagnan's past, specifically the day he receives these gifts. D'artagnan the elder tells his son never to sell the horse and to treat it well. He also gives him fifteen crowns in money and a letter of introduction addressed to an important court official and good acquaintance of his named Monsieur de Treville.

What does Faber tell Montag about books in Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury?

In Part Two of the novel, Montag visits Faber's home, and the two characters have an enlightening conversation regarding the significance of literature. Faber begins by calling Montag a "hopeless romantic" and proceeds to highlight the numerous positives found in the literary world. Faber tells Montag that books have quality and provide an in-depth, detailed look at life. Montag learns that good literature holds a mirror up to society, which can be difficult to experience and accept for some people—one reason why books are censured in Bradbury's dystopian nation.
Faber goes on to tell Montag that books provide necessary leisure time for individuals to collect their thoughts and process the world around them. In a fast-paced society, it is important to slow down, and reading a book provides the opportunity to relax. Literature also impacts readers to act upon the information they have digested. Readers can be influenced by a particular book and decide to change the world for the better by solving a social, political, or scientific problem. Faber also explains to Montag the importance of preserving knowledge in order for humans to learn from their past mistakes, which is another significant reason as to why books are necessary.

When Montag visits Faber at his apartment, he expresses his newfound belief that books might be the answer to his (and society's) miserable state. When Montag says this, Faber is quick to point out something important about books:

It's not books you need, it's some of the things that once were in books.

In other words, the book, as a physical object, is not important; a book is nothing more than paper and ink. It is the words written on the paper which really matter. These "pores of life," as Faber calls them, encourage the reader to think and question the world.
Moreover, for books to achieve their potential, people must have enough "leisure" time to digest their message. They must also have the intellectual and social freedom to "carry out actions" based on what they have learned from reading.
For Faber, then, it is not the books which are important but rather the ability to read and absorb the information without interference from the rest of society.

In the novel Treasure Island, how does Jim and Silver’s relationship change throughout the novel?

At the introduction of Long John Silver's character, he is a very intimidating figure. However, he takes a liking to Jim early on. While he is an imposing force, he becomes somewhat fatherly towards Jim, mentoring him and showing him the way of sea life. Jim, being a rather shy child initially, begins to come out of his shell more due to Silver's influence.
However, when they arrive on the island, Jim and his compatriots are betrayed by Silver and the other pirates. Because of the relationship between the two of them, though, Silver and Jim join forces and eventually reconcile, finding the treasure and abandoning the remaining pirate crew on the island. Upon arriving at home, Silver escapes, allowing him to live a free and wealthy life, and he and Jim part on good terms.

Throughout the novel, Jim's relationship with Silver changes and evolves. When the novel starts off, Jim looks up to Silver. He is fascinated with him and idolizes him. Silver feels the same way and sees Jim both as a son and as a younger version of himself. But as the story unfolds and Silver's true nature is revealed, the two drift apart, and Jim goes from idolizing Silver to needing him but no longer viewing him as a role model or father figure. Jim is not a pirate, nor is he cut out for a life of villainy and evil. Silver, on the other hand, is a pirate through and through and does not want to change his ways. Thus, Jim's relationship with Silver devolves into one of survival rather than admiration.

To some extent, the relationship between Jim Hawkins and Long John Silver resembles that of father and son. Jim loses his real father early on in the story, and Silver rapidly fills the void, becoming a kind of father figure to the young lad. Silver sees himself in young Jim:

I’ve always liked you, I have, for a lad of spirit, and the picture of my own self when I was young and handsome.

The devious pirate captain is prone to shameless flattery to get his own way, but it seems churlish to doubt the sincerity of this statement. For better or worse, Jim and Silver are bound together; it is almost as if they were destined for this. Like any father-son relationship, it has more than its fair share of ups and downs. Despite this, there remains an enduring bond between them, one based on a mutual understanding that sets them apart from the other characters in the story:

I’ll save your life, if so be as I can—from them. But, see here, Jim—tit for tat—you save long John from swinging.

On a ship full of greedy, double-crossing murderers and thieves, it pays to have someone around you can trust. While this trust is based largely on self-interest, it is still there, nonetheless. Jim needs to be protected from Silver's despicable crew; Silver needs to be protected from the gallows. Either way, they need each other if they are to survive. It says something about the strength of the bond between them that when Jim tells Silver about his single-handed hiding of the ship and his killing of Israel Hands, Silver does not doubt him in the slightest. This is exactly the kind of thing that Silver himself would have done at his age.
But the father-son relationship is ultimately a dysfunctional one, not least because Jim and Silver, despite sharing certain character traits, are fundamentally different people. Jim is a conventionally good character, whereas Long John Silver is much more ambiguous, acting according to the dictates of his own system of values. Silver may not be a father in the Pap Finn mold, but there is no doubt that for him, number one comes first every time. Father figure or not, he is still a pirate, and that will always influence his relationship with Jim Hawkins.

Single Variable Calculus, Chapter 7, 7.2-1, Section 7.2-1, Problem 66

Determine the intervals of increase or decrease, the intervals of concavity and the points of inflection of $\displaystyle f(x) = \frac{e^x}{x^2}$.


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

\text{if } f(x) =& \frac{e^x}{x^2}, \text{then by using Quotient Rule..}
\\
\\
f'(x) =& \frac{x^2 (e^x) - e^x (2x)}{(x^2)^2} = \frac{xe^x (x - 2)}{x^4} = \frac{e^x (x - 2)}{x^3}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


Again, by using Quotient Rule as well as Product Rule..


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

f''(x) =& \frac{x^3 [e^x (1) + e^x (x - 2)] - [e^x(x - 2)] (3x^2) }{(x^3)^2}
\\
\\
f''(x) =& \frac{x^2 [x^2 e^x - xe^x - 3xe^x + 6e^x]}{x^6}
\\
\\
f''(x) =& \frac{x^2 e^x - 4xe^x + 6ex}{x^4}
\\
\\
f''(x) =& \frac{e^x (x^2 - 4x + 6)}{x^4}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


Now, to determine the intervals of increase or decrease, we must get first the critical numbers by setting $f'(x) = 0$. So,

$\displaystyle f'(x) = \frac{e^x (x - 2)}{x^3}$

when $f'(x) = 0$

$\displaystyle 0 = \frac{e^x (x - 2)}{x^3}$

The real solution is..

$x = 2$

Hence, the interval of increase or decrease is..

$
\begin{array}{|c|c|c|}
\hline\\
\text{Interval} & f'(x) & f \\
\hline\\
x < 2 & - & \text{decreasing on } (- \infty, 2 ) \\
\hline\\
x > 2 & + & \text{increasing on } (2, \infty)\\
\hline
\end{array}
$

Next to determine the inflection points, we set $f''(x) = 0$. So,

$\displaystyle 0 = \frac{e^x (x^2 - 4x + 6)}{x^4}$

It shows that we have no inflection point because we don't have real solution for the equation. Let's evaluate $f''(x)$ with interval..

$
\begin{array}{|c|c|c|}
\hline\\
\text{Interval} & f''(x) & \text{Concavity} \\
\hline\\
x < 0 & - & \text{Downward} \\
\hline\\
x > 0 & - & \text{Downward}\\
\hline
\end{array}
$

The function has downward concavity at $(- \infty,

0)$ and $(0, \infty)$.

Why does Jack Worthing call himself Ernest instead when he is in town?

It's an ironic play on words—just like his surname Worthing, implying "worthy," which is how best to describe his existence of outward respectability in the countryside. Yet Jack is neither worthy nor earnest when he comes to London. He has created the character of Ernest as an alter ego; he's supposed to be an improvident rake, always getting into trouble of one kind or another. The persona of Ernest allows Jack to take off to London at a moment's notice, to try and help his "brother" out of another jam. In actual fact, it's a great opportunity for Jack to indulge himself in a life of dissipated gaiety, far away from the prying eyes of his respectable family. This not particularly earnest Ernest can play the part of man about town to his debauched heart's content without the burden of looking after Cecily weighing down upon his shoulders.

int_0^1 xe^(x^2) dx Use integration tables to evaluate the definite integral.

For the given problem: int_0^1 xe^(x^2) , we may first  solve for its indefinite integral. Indefinite integral are written in the form of int f(x) dx = F(x) +C
 where: f(x) as the integrand
           F(x) as the anti-derivative function 
           C  as the arbitrary constant known as constant of integration
We omit the arbitrary constant C when we have a boundary values: a to b. We follow formula: int_a^b f(x) dx = F(x)|_a^b .
 Form the table of integrals, we follow the indefinite integral formula for exponential function as:
int xe^(-ax^2) dx = - 1/(2a)e^(-ax^2) +C
By comparison of -ax^2  with x^2 shows that we let a= -1 .
Plug-in a=-1 on -ax^2 for checking, we get: - (-1) x^2= +x^2 or x^2 .
Plug-in a=-1 on  integral formula, we get:
int_0^1 xe^(x^2) =- 1/(2(-1))e^((-(-1)x^2))| _0^1
              =- 1/(-2)e^((1*x^2))| _0^1
              = 1/2e^(x^2)| _0^1
Applying definite integral formula: F(x)|_a^b = F(b)-= F(a) .
1/2e^(x^2)| _0^1 =1/2e^(1^2) -1/2e^(0^2)
             =1/2e^(1) -1/2e^(0)
             =1/2e -1/2 *1
             = 1/2e -1/2 or 1/2(e-1)

Comment on the ironic ending of the story Dusk.

The ending of “Dusk” revolves around two interrelated ironies, both of which stem from Norman Gortsby’s condescending behavior and egocentric worldview. These interrelated ironies offer the reader a sort of lesson, reminding us of the dangers of judging ourselves to be too clever—a crime that ultimately leads to Gortsby’s defeat. 
The short story opens with Gortsby at a park where he is taking pleasure in the supposed defeat of those around him. A young man approaches him, explaining that he is a visitor who is unable to remember the name or location of his hotel. The man explains that he left the hotel to purchase some soap, and he asks Gortsby if he would be willing to lend him some money. After the young man is unable to produce the aforementioned soap, Gortsby decides that the tale is too fanciful and thus a lie. The young man leaves Gortsby behind, but moments later Gortsby finds a small soap on the ground. Gortsby takes this as evidence that he was mistaken, and he leaves to find the man so that he can loan him some money.
Gortsby takes the encounter as a reminder to trust others, noting that “It’s a lesson to me not to be too clever in judging by circumstances.” This “lesson” is another moment of Gortsby’s condescension, and the irony becomes clear a moment later when an old man comes by looking for his misplaced soap. The soap that Gortsby found and interpreted as evidence was nothing more than a coincidence: it was mistakenly dropped by another and of no relationship to the boy. Part of the irony of the ending revolves around this sudden epiphany so soon after Gortsby’s “lesson.”
The other irony of the ending is the way that it produces a reversal of the story’s opening. In the opening of the short story, we learn that Gortsby is in the park at dusk because he believes that it provides him with the opportunity to look out at the “men and women, who had fought and lost.” Gortsby takes a

certain cynical pleasure in observing and labeling his fellow wonders as they went their ways in the dark stretches between the lamp-light.

While Gortsby is at the park to objectify and take pleasure in what he might refer to as the losers around him, the ending of the story inverts this dynamic. The young man takes pleasure—and coin—from Gortsby, transforming him into an object in his scheme. The ironic twist of the end stems fully from Gortsby’s own condescending views of those around him, transforming him into a victim of his own ego.

How does blood signify Macbeth's guilt?

Immediately after Macbeth assassinates King Duncan, he looks down at his bloodstained hands and says,

"Will all great Neptune’s ocean wash this blood Clean from my hand? No, this my hand will rather The multitudinous seas incarnadine, Making the green one red" (Shakespeare, 2.2.61-64).

In the play, blood represents Duncan's murder, the consequences attached to Macbeth's serious crimes, and the feelings of guilt that both Macbeth and his wife experience following the assassination. The fact that Macbeth believes that all of the oceans in the world will not be able to clean the blood from his hands signifies his extreme guilt. Lady Macbeth responds to her husband's comments by saying that "a little water clears us of this deed." Ironically, Lady Macbeth also becomes overwhelmed with guilt and begins hallucinating, believing that her hands are constantly covered in blood.
In an attempt to secure his throne and establish a lasting legacy, Macbeth hires assassins to murder Banquo and Fleance. Following Banquo's death, Macbeth begins to hallucinate and sees Banquo's ghost during a banquet. After Lady Macbeth persuades the Scottish lords to leave, Macbeth says,

"It will have blood, they say. Blood will have blood. Stones have been known to move, and trees to speak" (Shakespeare, 3.4.128-130).

Once again, Macbeth's comments about blood correspond to the guilt he feels regarding his crimes. His thoughts of blood indicate that he has not forgotten about his horrific crimes, which continue to haunt him.

Why did the author of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks break the book into three sections--"Life," "Death, and "Immortality"?

Rebecca Skloot, the author of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, split the book into three sections to humanize the story and help the reader understand the ethical issues involved with the scientific use of HeLa cells in research. Skloot takes time throughout her book to introduce Henrietta's family members and including their stories. As the reader, we can see how the loss of Henrietta and the other traumas they have experienced have impacted the family. The use of three sections ("Life", "Death", and "Immortality") helps Skloot reinforce her thesis that what happened to Henrietta was morally and ethically wrong and that the Lacks family is owed some kind of reparations.
In the section "Life," Skloot introduces the reader to the Lacks family, tells the story of Henrietta's diagnosis of cervical cancer, and ends the section by talking about her death. Skloot jumps the reader between Henrietta's timeline and her own experiences as she tries to learn more about the Lacks family and their general mistrust of reporters and white people interested in Henrietta's cells. This is also the section where Skloot begins to tell the reader about the success of the HeLa cells. While Henrietta was dying from her cancer, her cells were growing in George Gey's lab.
In the section "Death," Skloot takes us through Henrietta's death and its impacts on her family and the scientists hoping to develop her cells into a viable research cell line. George Gey, the researcher at Johns Hopkins, pestered the family into approving an autopsy so he could collect as many tumor samples as possible and see if he could get them to grow into more HeLa cells.
In the section "Immortality," Skloot tells the reader about how the Lacks family found out about HeLa cells and how they were connected to Henrietta. She also tells us how a reporter had published a book that quoted extensively from Henrietta's medical records without asking or talking to her family before publishing. Skloot goes on to tell us about the first time Henrietta's children ever see HeLa cells and how they live knowing that their mother's cells were taken without permission and are used around the world in scientific research. In this way, Henrietta (or part of her) lives on forever.
The three sections work together to highlight the mistreatment of the Lacks family and the systems caused issues for the family. These sections also help the reader break the narrative of Henrietta, the author, and the cell line into three distinct sections that are related in time, space, and theme.

Rather than ordering the events chronologically, author Rebecca Skloot divides the book The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks into separate sections: "Life," "Death," and "Immortality." These larger sections, or chunks of the book, help to organize and group the chapters in a creative way.
The first section, "Life," traces Henrietta's early years. In this section, readers learn about when and where she was born, her mother and father, who she married, and how many children she had. The end of this section is a segue to the next section, where we learn about her diagnosis of cervical cancer.
The second section, "Death," is not just about Henrietta's death. It is also where readers learn about the ethical mistreatment of Henrietta that occurred when doctors removed her cancer cells to be used in experimental research without her consent. The result of the research led to a major breakthrough in creating what is known to be one the most important scientific breakthroughs: HeLa, an immortal cell line.
The third section, "Immortality," addresses the complications and advancement of research using Henrietta's cells—all of which happened without her or her family's permission. This section raises several questions not only about medical ethics but also about race, socioeconomic status, and gender.
Together, the three sections weave in and out of one another and come together to show the hardships and challenges her family was left to face.

Rebecca Skloot, the author of The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks, split the book into three distinct sections--"Life," "Death," and "Immortality"--in order to describe the events of Henrietta's life (and the continued life of her cells) in a logical manner.
Thus, the "Life" sections deals with Henrietta's childhood, as she was raised by her grandfather on a farm which had once belonged to a slave owner.
The "Death" section naturally deals with Henrietta's death from cervical cancer and the removal of cells--without consent--from henrietta's cervix during a radiation treatment.
The "Immortality" section deals with the use of Henrietta's cells (which were the first human cells grown in a culture outside of the body) in over 60,000 scientific studies across the world. This section also addresses the immense ethical and financial issues that arose out of the use of these cells, which were removed and replicated without permission from Henrietta or her family.
Interspersed into the narrative is the story of how dramatically this theft of genetic material impacted her family, who received no compensation for these actions (in spite of the immense profits that the cells yielded through medical experimentation) and suffered emotionally upon learning of this violation. 

How do Naomi and her brother, Stephen, differ in character, and how do they view their Japanese heritage?

In Joy Kogawa's novel Obasan, Naomi and her brother, Stephen, have very different relationships with their Japanese heritage. The novel is about the internment of citizens of Japanese descent in Canada during World War II, which Naomi, now an adult, remembers happening during her childhood.
Although Naomi, now a schoolteacher without a family of her own, struggles to forget the horrors of her past and she wonders about the ways traditional Japanese gender roles might have hurt her and other Japanese women, Naomi has more of a connection to her family. She feels a strong connection to Obasan, her aunt, and her uncle, who raised her, and her visit with Obasan brings up her memories of what it was like to grow up as a Japanese Canadian girl when she did. In the end, she feels a connection to her mother.
Stephen also tries to forget his past, but he does so far more than Naomi; he represses everything about his Japanese heritage. He is embarrassed by his family and anything that might be considered "too Japanese," and he has willfully tried to forget anything about the language and culture. He is outwardly more successful than Naomi—he has a functioning relationship and successful career as a musician—but he is very unhappy due to his complete repression of the events of his past and everything about his heritage and family.
On the surface, with regard to traditional Western expectations, Stephen is more successful than Naomi, but it is Naomi who faces her demons and connects to her culture more than Stephen ever does.

Discuss some of the key turning points in the Revolutionary War and how they changed the direction of the war.

Given that the Revolution was ultimately successful, the turning points usually cited are ones that were victories for the Patriot side. These are well known: Trenton in December of 1776, in which Washington instantly reversed what had seemed a headlong descent into defeat occurring over the previous months; and Saratoga in September of 1777, in which Burgoyne's entire army surrendered. However, on the eight-year path to victory, there were also several turning points that temporarily seemed to indicate a British victory was imminent (though the fact that the Americans always lived to fight another day demonstrated the essential futility of the British effort).
The British victory at Brandywine in September 1777 and the subsequent occupation of Philadelphia forced Washington into an almost impossible situation in having to remove his army to Valley Forge, where he was unable to obtain an adequate supply of provisions for the men. There was also, presumably, a huge symbolism in the British takeover of the largest city, where independence had been declared a year and a half earlier. Yet the fact that Washington's army survived, and soon after the winter was over managed to secure a victory at Monmouth in New Jersey, indicated that the British had accomplished nothing, in spite of the enormous support they had had from the Loyalist crowd in Philadelphia. So, the winter of 1777–1778, though tragic for Washington's army, was nevertheless a turning point in favor of the rebellion.
The British victory at Charleston, South Carolina, in May 1780 was also what appeared to be a major triumph that would, or could, signal that the rebellion was close to being crushed. The British captured a strategic port, took thousands of prisoners, and confiscated enormous stocks of guns and ammunition. But ironically, this turning point was the beginning of the end for the British. Their new strategy was to bring the war to the southern colonies—since there were more Loyalists in the south than elsewhere, they assumed these people would help the British in quashing the rebellion. But once the British made their incursions into the south, their heavy-handed tactics backfired. Much of the initially neutral civilian population turned against the British. In the southern campaigns, there was no single turning point for the Patriots, at least until the final victory at Yorktown in October 1781. But there were smaller turning points, of which I would mention:
The battle of Kings Mountain in October 1780. An ad hoc army of patriot militias defeated a force led by the British Maj. Ferguson (the inventor of the Ferguson rifle). It showed that there was grassroots and determined resistance to the British by the mountaineer Americans who lived in the western Carolinas.
The Battle of Cowpens in January 1781. This Patriot victory crushed the feared British Col. Tarleton, who had created havoc across the Carolinas, and showed that innovative tactics by the Americans under Gen. Daniel Morgan could defeat the British.
The series of engagements fought against Cornwallis by Gen. Nathaniel Greene during the southern campaign exhausted Cornwallis, in spite of each of the battles being a tactical British victory.With his forces worn down, Cornwallis did not have any viable options. Holed up in Yorktown, he was trapped by the arrival of Washington's and Rochembeau's armies and DeGrasse's fleet. The combined American-French victory finally made Parliament realize it was useless to continue fighting, and the decision was made to begin negotiations and grant independence to the colonies.

The American Revolution (1775–1783) was a long and difficult war. What began as a civil war eventually became a world war as France and other nations joined the American side. Foreign aid was crucial to America's eventual triumph.
Early battles were fought around Boston and New York. The war's first battle at Lexington and Concord was an American victory. Heavy British losses at Bunker Hill led the British to evacuate Boston. Then the British occupied New York and defeated George Washington. By 1777, the British held New York and Philadelphia.
The tide turned in 1777–1778. An entire British army had to surrender at Saratoga, in northern New York. Then France entered the war on America's side.
But the war was not yet over. Britain still possessed a powerful navy and a professional army. The British tried to conquer the southern colonies, but they were finally defeated by the Americans' hit-and-run tactics.
The last battle at Yorktown, Virginia, in 1781 basically ended the war. Assisted by French troops and ships, George Washington forced another British army to surrender.
The surrenders of British armies at Saratoga and Yorktown were decisive turning points. Saratoga brought France into the war, and Yorktown convinced the British to give up and grant the Americans their independence.

Two important points were the 1777-1778 winter at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania and the 1781 South Carolina Battle of Cowpens.
The Continental Army forces commanded by George Washington were not well equipped and the soldiers' commitment was tested during the winter of 1777-1778. They were encamped for six months at Valley Forge, on the outskirts of Philadelphia, which the British controlled. Washington worried that the army would disband, but they held on. Finally in June, new troops arrived and the army marched on to New Jersey.
In the South, where the British were in control, the Americans were determined to take the Carolinas. Near the town of Cowpens, South Carolina, through a combination of superior numbers and strategy, General Morgan's American forces defeated the British under Tarleton. This break in British control forced Cornwallis to change plans and paved the way for the decisive encounters at Yorktown, Virginia nine months later.
https://www.ushistory.org/march/phila/valleyforge.htm

There were several key points in the Revolutionary War. One key point was the Battle of Saratoga. The British had hoped to isolate the New England colonies from the rest of the colonies by winning at Saratoga. For various reasons, the British were unable to win this battle. This gave hope to the colonists that they could fight with the British and win important battles. It also sent a signal to England’s rivals, France and Spain, that the colonists had a real chance to win the Revolutionary War. The French and Spanish began to help the colonists after their victory at Saratoga. For example, they sent the colonists supplies and money.
Another key moment was the colonial victory at Yorktown. With help from the French navy, General Washington was able to surround the British at Yorktown. When General Cornwallis realized he was surrounded and had no way out of Yorktown, he surrendered. This victory brought the Revolutionary War to an end.
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/battle-of-yorktown-begins

https://www.saratoga.com/aboutsaratoga/battle-of-saratoga/

How are Native Americans represented in William Bradford's work?

When William Bradford initially describes the Native Americans in Of Plymouth Plantation, he speaks of them as barbaric savages. He describes them as violent and wild, saying that, unlike the welcoming reception provided by the natives of Malta for the apostle Paul, the Pilgrims, when met by the "savage barbarians" of the New World, found that they "were readier to fill [our] sides full of arrows than otherwise." Clearly, Bradford really does not think of them as people, as they seem more like wild animals than men to him.
Bradford describes the Pilgrims' first encounter with the Native Americans as an actual attack on the part of the Indians. One of the Pilgrims came running to tell the others of the attack, and "withal, their arrows came flying amongst [us]. [Our] men ran with all speed to recover [our] arms, as by the good providence of God [we] did." The colonists were victorious and fought off the Indians, but Bradford describes their cry as "dreadful." The whole incident only adds to the feeling that he does not think of the natives as people—people from whom the Pilgrims had actually taken corn and beans (though they later paid the natives back, Bradford says)—but rather as some hellish adversary in the frightening wilderness.
The first winter in Massachusetts was a deadly one for the Pilgrims; they lost half their numbers to cold, disease, and hunger. Bradford describes their "low and sick condition" pitifully. He says that, during this time, they would sometimes see Indians "aloof off," but whenever they tried to approach the Indians, "they would run away." Once, the Indians even stole their tools. However, one day, an Indian man named Samoset came, and "he became profitable to [us] in acquainting [us] with many things concerning the state of the country in the east parts where he lived, which was afterwards profitable unto [us]." Samoset introduced the Pilgrims to Squanto, whose English was better than Samoset's, and a sort of peace treaty was struck.

[Squanto] directed them how to set their corn, where to take fish, and to procure other commodities, and was also their pilot to bring them to unknown places for their profit, and never left them till he died.

From this point on, although Bradford is not friendly in his descriptions of the Native Americans, his word choice lacks the same level of ignorance and biting prejudice that characterized his earlier descriptions. Once the Indians help ensure that the Pilgrims will not continue to die of starvation, Bradford takes a somewhat less caustic tone with them.

Identify examples of the reasonable voice of Jonathan Swift’s authorial persona in "A Modest Proposal," such as the title of the essay itself.

Swift uses several methods of conveying a rational, humane tone in the opening paragraphs of "A Modest Proposal" before revealing what the actual proposal is.
First, the writer presents himself as a man of compassion, citing the unfortunate state of affairs in Ireland and the poverty that exists there. He claims that the mothers,

[...] instead of being able to work for their honest livelihood, are forced to employ all their time in strolling to beg sustenance for their helpless infants who, as they grow up, either turn thieves for want of work, or leave their dear native country to fight for the Pretender in Spain, or sell themselves to the Barbadoes.

Second, he presents himself as a man of science, criticizing the judgement of others who have studied the same situation and claiming that his own research has yielded new information:

As to my own part, having turned my thoughts for many years upon this important subject, and maturely weighed the several schemes of other projectors, I have always found them grossly mistaken in their computation.

He then goes into a series of computations of his own regarding the demographics of Ireland, citing statistics about the total population, the number of women of child-bearing age, and the number of children who need to be cared for, in the guise of one whose wish is nothing more than to alleviate suffering. All of this gives a pseudo-technical veneer to the ideas being expressed, so that the reader finds himself or herself reflexively agreeing with the writer and judging him compassionate and wise, until his actual plan is suddenly revealed:

I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout.

Today we can hopefully find additional amusement in Swift's alluding to "a very knowing" American as the source of his information about the benefits of cannibalism. But this caps off the whole style of the introductory paragraphs in which Swift's persona sounds so kind, rational, genial and authoritative, that the reader is ready to agree with anything he proposes.

Swift's persona, whose views are the opposite of Swift himself, falsely believes himself to be a reasonable person. He believes it is perfectly rational, and even kind, to suggest fattening and selling the babies of the poor for the rich to eat. The word "modest" as a way to describe this proposal shows that this utterly clueless narrator thinks his idea is reasonable. The word "modest" means unassuming. It means ordinary, as a modest home could be described as very ordinary; however, this proposal is anything but ordinary. 
The narrator also focuses closely on the nitty-gritty of such "rational" parts of his proposals as a careful calculation of the profitability of raising a baby for a year to be sold as food and showing how much "return" a poor mother would get on the investment. He talks about the benefits of the "commerce" in babies to such things as Ireland's balance of trade. By emphasizing these economic benefits, he completely loses sight of the moral depravity of what he is suggesting.
Through this narrator, Swift is arguing that viewing humans only in economic terms is dehumanizing. Humans are more than economic units and deserve genuine compassion that isn't based on profit and loss.

Define the term channel richness as it relates to the communication process. Briefly, describe and defend the level of richness you would select when addressing a workplace conflict in the preliminary stage.

The richer a channel of communication is, the more information the person on the receiving end of the communication is receiving. Verbal communication is always richer than non-verbal communication, because the listener can pick up more information than what he or she is being told. This is done by looking at facial expressions and gestures, and listening to the tone of voice used. A conversation, whether held face to face or over video-conferencing, is an extremely "rich" form of communication.
A blog would be considered to be of "medium" richness, because the writer is generally free to express him/herself openly, and the turns of phrase used can be very insightful.
A spreadsheet full of data or a general ledger are considered to be about the "lowest" in terms of channel richness. The information you have is the data, and there is no way to gain anything further from that information.
When addressing a workplace conflict, I certainly wouldn't do this by means of a spreadsheet! The best way to address a workplace conflict in its preliminary stages would be to open the channels of communication as much as possible. This would mean a face to face meeting with the person or people involved. This is particularly important if one was acting as a mediator between two members of staff who had been involved in a conflict with one another. The more information (both verbal and non-verbal) that can be given, received and shared, the better.
https://open.lib.umn.edu/principlesmanagement/chapter/12-6-communication-channels/

Channel richness is defined as the suitability of a communication medium. The adequacy of the medium is determined based on its effectiveness in the communication process.
Channel richness is determined by how much information the channel can reproduce and how well the receiver can interpret and respond. For instance, face to face communication is considered a rich channel because it can reproduce most of the sender’s information. The receiver interprets the message based on additional cues from the sender. The signals include the following: tone, gestures, and body language.
Conflict situations require a channel that is fast and effective. A rich channel would ensure that the response is prompt and well interpreted. During the preliminary stage, a phone call or face to face conversation would be appropriate to prevent escalation of the conflict. The two channels ensure that contact is established.
https://www.encyclopedia.com/finance/finance-and-accounting-magazines/communication-channels

Explain how Ponyboy grows and matures by referring to his change in views of the Greasers and Socs as well as his changing perceptions of his brother Darry.

Ponyboy is different than the other Greasers, and the other Greasers know this. It's why Johnny tells him to "stay gold" and Two-Bit doesn't want him to "get tough."

"Ponyboy, listen, don't get tough. You're not like the rest of us and don't try to be..."

With that said, it still takes readers much of the novel to fully understand what it is that makes Ponyboy so different. When we first meet Ponyboy, he seems like a typical Greaser to us. He speaks negatively about the Socs in the same way that all of the other Greasers talk about them. He thinks that the Socs have it so much easier than the Greasers.

I really couldn't see what Socs would have to sweat about—good grades, good cars, good girls, madras and Mustangs and Corvairs—Man, I thought, if I had worries like that I'd consider myself lucky.

Ponyboy and his opinion of the Greasers starts to change in chapter 2. This is when he meets Cherry, and she is incredibly pivotal to Pony's changing opinion. Cherry is the character that makes Ponyboy believe that the Socs have problems that are equal in difficulty as compared to Greaser problems.

"Things are rough all over."
"I believe you," I said. "We'd better get back out there with the popcorn or Two-Bit'll think I ran off with his money."

By the novel's end, Ponyboy is able to look at a Soc as a person and not a rival gang member, and this is why Ponyboy tells Two-Bit that Randy isn't a Soc.

"What'd he want?" Two-Bit asked. "What'd Mr. Super-Soc have to say?"
"He ain't a Soc," I said, "he's just a guy. He just wanted to talk."

As for Ponyboy's opinion of his brother, by the novel's end Ponyboy realizes that Darry loves him deeply. Ponyboy doubted it because Darry was always so hard on Pony, but Ponyboy comes to realize that is because Darry wants to protect Ponyboy and see him succeed. Darry didn't have the luxury of learning to be a parent. He was thrown into the situation, and he struggles with how to show love to Ponyboy while being a parent and brother at the same time.

In that second what Soda and Dally and Two-Bit had been trying to tell me came through. Darry did care about me, maybe as much as he cared about Soda, and because he cared he was trying too hard to make something of me. When he yelled "Pony, where have you been all this time?" he meant "Pony, you've scared me to death. Please be careful, because I couldn't stand it if anything happened to you."

How is Hermia in A Midsummer Night's Dream foolish?

One action Hermia takes that one might say is foolish is letting Helena know that she and Lysander are eloping and will be traveling through the woods in order to do so. She doesn't seem to realize that Helena will try to use that knowledge to get into Demetrius's good graces—though that plan doesn't work very well for Helena! If Hermia hadn't told Helena, the entire adventure in the woods might not have happened; she and Lysander might have left Athens altogether instead. As it happens, with the help of the fairies, it all turns out for the best, with Demetrius ending up in love with Helena—at least, if you consider a permanent magically induced love a happy ending. However, Hermia doesn't know this will happen at the outset. She and Lysander have made a plan that they think is their best chance at happiness. Revealing this plan to Helena without considering that her friend might pass on the information is, indeed, rather foolish.

What is the point of view in the short story "A Problem" by Anton Chekhov?

The point of view in Chekhov's story "A Problem" is that of the young college student Sasha Uskov, although Chekhov does not make this fact conspicuous. Sasha is sitting "in the hall by the door leading to the study," where his relatives are very heatedly discussing a problem the young man has created by cashing a "false promissory note" at a bank. This sort of thing could not be done in modern America, but evidently it was common in Russia at the time. Sasha had created a promissory note and forged another name to it. It other words it looked as if the other person owed Sasha that sume of money. Then he had cashed the note at a bank at a discount. He had intended to redeem the note before it became due, but when the due-date arrived he didn't have the money he had expected. The family is in an uproar because this is a criminal offense. They either have to pay to redeem the delinquent note or let the young man go on trial. The reason we know that this story is being told from Sasha's point of view is that Sasha can hear everything through the door.

Sasha Uskov sat at the door and listened. He felt neither terror, shame, nor depression, but only weariness and inward emptiness. It seemed to him that it made absolutely no difference to him whether they forgave him or not; he had come here to hear his sentence and to explain himself simply because kind-hearted Ivan Markovitch had begged him to do so. He was not afraid of the future. It made no difference to him where he was: here in the hall, in prison, or in Siberia.

Chekhov not only shows that Sasha can hear everything that is going on in the study, but he also describes the young man's thoughts and feelings. Then eventually Sasha is called into the study to be cross-examined and upbraided by the family.

Sasha went into the study. The official of the Treasury was sitting down; the Colonel was standing before the table with one hand in his pocket and one knee on a chair. It was smoky and stifling in the study. Sasha did not look at the official or the Colonel; he felt suddenly ashamed and uncomfortable.

So then Sasha can not only hear the people in the study but can see them and talk to them. It is unmistakably in his point of view. After Sasha leaves the study again, he has interactions with various family members, including especially his uncle Ivan Markovitch, and he overhears other family members, including his own mother.

unseen in the study at that moment...the unhappy, saintly woman was weeping, grieving, and begging for her boy.

Everything that occurs in the story can be assumed to be seen, heard, or felt by the principal character Sasha Uskov, who ironically does not display much of an emotional reaction to the nearly hysterical behavior of his gathering of close relatives. Although Sasha has created "a problem" for the entire family, he does not seem to regard it as his problem at all. 

Who is John Hale Finch?

John Hale Finch is Atticus's younger brother. He is ten years younger than Atticus, and we learn that Atticus lives frugally for a time so that he can help his brother get a start in life. Atticus "invests" in putting John—or "Jack," as he is called—through medical school so that he can establish himself as a doctor during a time when "cotton was not worth growing." After giving his younger brother his chance, Atticus can then live comfortably on his earnings as a lawyer.
We also learn that Jack, who is shorter than Atticus, becomes rich as a doctor, and that every Christmas he "yells across the street" for Miss Maudie to marry him, which she, of course, refuses to do. Jack himself jokes that he will never marry, because raising children is too difficult.
Scout and the rest of her family meet up with Jack every year at Christmas at Finch's Landing. Scout recounts a Christmas in which Uncle Jack spanks her for attacking Francis but then is remorseful when he learns from her that he should have listened to her side of the story. We find out from this incident that Jack and Atticus have a close, comfortable relationship. Scout learns about Atticus's child-rearing wisdom and Atticus's worries for them over the upcoming Robinson trial from overhearing the two brothers talk.

John Hale Finch is Atticus's younger brother in the novel To Kill a Mockingbird. John is referred to as Uncle Jack and is a well-educated, morally upright doctor. Uncle Jack lives in Nashville and visits his brother's family during Christmas time. Scout and Jem enjoy his presence, and he gives them both air rifles for Christmas. Uncle Jack is a humorous man who doesn't have any children of his own. Scout teaches her uncle a lesson in parenting after he unknowingly punishes her for defending Atticus. Uncle Jack jumps to conclusions and spanks Scout after she punches Francis in the face. When they return home from Finch's Landing, Scout tells Uncle Jack the reason why she hit Francis in the face. Uncle Jack immediately apologizes and is upset at himself for treating Scout unfairly. Later on that night, Scout overhears Uncle Jack talking to his brother about the upcoming trial.

Beginning Algebra With Applications, Chapter 3, 3.2, Section 3.2, Problem 180

Forensic scientists have determined that the equation $H = 2.9 L + 78.1$ can be used to approximate the height $H$, in centimeters, of an adult on the basis length $L$, in centimeters, of its humerus (the bone extending from the shoulder to the elbow).

According to this formula, what is the length of the humerus of an adult whose height is 168 cm?

Solving for the Humerus $L$,


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

H =& 2.9 L + 78.1
&& \text{Given equation}
\\
\\
H - 78.1 =& 2.9 L
&& \text{Subtract } 78.1
\\
\\
\frac{H - 78.1}{2.9} =& L
&& \text{Divide by } 2.9
\\
\\
\frac{168-78.1}{2.9} =& L
&& \text{Substitute } H = 168
\\
\\
\frac{89.9}{2.90} =& L
&& \text{Simplify}
\\
\\
L =& 31 \text{ cm}
&&

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


The length of the Humerus of an adult is $31$ cm.

Do you consider the Anarchist in "The Stolen Bacillus" by H. G. Wells to be the victim of a prank?

In "The Stolen Bacillus," the Anarchist is not the victim of a deliberate prank, in the traditional sense. In fact, the Bacteriologist has no idea that his visitor is an anarchist who intends to steal the bacillus for the purposes of poisoning the water supply. Instead, he thinks that the Anarchist is simply a curious visitor to his laboratory and the Bacteriologist has no knowledge of the man's real intentions. It is for this reason that he shows him the bacillus and, as a means of impressing him, he claims to have live cholera in his possession. This attempt at showing off quickly backfires, however, when the Anarchist takes the bacillus and disappears from the laboratory. The Bacteriologist then gives chase but only because creating the bacillus is a troublesome process, not because the Anarchist has taken live cholera. This is demonstrated by his comment at the end of the story:

But the bother is, I shall have all the trouble and expense of preparing some more.

In essence, then, the Anarchist is the victim of a misunderstanding as opposed to a deliberate prank.

Where is self-betrayal in 1984?

Betraying others is an essential survival strategy in the totalitarian state of Oceania. The Party doesn't want you to trust anyone else. That way, instead of turning to your family and fellow citizens for support, you turn to the Party. The Party is always right, and only the Party can be trusted. As everyone is under suspicion, you can never be sure that someone won't turn you in to the authorities to save their own skin. In such a situation, there's no choice but to get your retaliation in first; to betray them before they betray you.
This is the toxic environment in which the people of Oceania are forced to live. As well as betraying others, it's often necessary to betray yourself. Whatever you personally feel about the regime, you need to suppress it as best you can and convince yourself that any problems you encounter are your fault and not the Party's.
In book 3, chapter 5, that's the situation in which Winston finds himself. In betraying Julia under torture, he is also betraying himself. In his very depths, Winston hates Big Brother and everything he represents. But his spirit has been utterly destroyed, and so he emerges from the horrors of Room 101 a broken man, ready to begin his reintegration into society.