I'm writing a paper, and I can't think of the name of the indian girl who has a miscarriage at Harvard and was going to marry Joel. Please help,...

You are thinking of Anne. She is the young woman who had
the miscarriage that Bethia Mayfield helped deliver. The controversy over that baby is
how far along the pregnancy was. Bethia is very confident that Anne was further along in
the pregnancy than the midwife, Goody Branch, says she was. If Bethia is right, then she
was pregnant before she arrived at Cambridge and the scandal of her pregnancy has no
touch on the young men at the school, but Branch claims the fetus is smaller, and that
puts the affair to have taken place at Cambridge where she could be subject to public
humiliation and punishment by whipping. Anne refuses to the end to admits who the father
of the baby was, and is ultimately saved by Bethia who arranges to send her off to the
Island.

How do I answer the following? I have no understanding of probability!Two dice are rolled. The sum of the values are recorded. 1. Define the sample...

We have two regular 6-sides
dice.

Then, we know that each die has the outcomes (1, 2,
3, 4, 5, or, 6)

Now we rolled 2
dice.

We need to find the sample
space.

The sample space is all possible outcomes of the
event.

In this example, the sample space is obtained from
the sum of the numbers on both dice.

Possible outcomes
are:

(1+1) = 2

(1+2) = (2+1)=
3

(2+3) = (3+2)= (1+4) = (4+1)=
5

(3+3) = (2+4) = (4+2) = (1+5) = (5+1) =
6

(3+4) = (4+3) = (2+5) = (5+1) = (1+6) = (6+1) =
7

(4+4) = (5+3) = (3+5) ...... =
8

(5+4) = (4+5) .............=
9

(6+4) = (4+ 6) .............=
10

(5+6) = (6+5) ...............=
11

(6+6) =
12

1)Then, we conclude that the sample space
is { 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11,
12 }

Now we need to determine the
probability of having a sum of 9.

We know that all possible
outcomes are 6*6 = 36 possible outcome.

Now we need to
determine the possibility of getting a sum of 9.

To get a
sum of 9 we need to get the followsing outcomes.

==>
(4+5) ,  (5+4) ,  ( 3+6) ,or (6+3)

The total is 4
pairs.

2. Then the probability is 4/36 =
1/9

Find one example in each poem of a feature that could help a storyteller recite that poem.The Wanderer, The Seafarer, A Wife's Lament. Explain why...

The poetry of the Anglo-Saxon period was overwhelmingly
elegiac. What this means is that the poems told the story of a person's life by
revealing the personal thoughts and feelings of a single
speaker.

These poems were also considered lyrical in the
fact that they denoted the thoughts and feelings of a single speaker and spoke about the
events in the speaker's life.

Not only did the poems speak
to the events within one's life, the poems also had lyrical elements. What this refers
to is the fact that the poems of this period were typically sung. With no global, or
even local, language, the epics and poems of this period were
sung.

Therefore, all three poems, "The Wanderer," "The
Seafarer," and "The Wife's Lament" were elegiac and lyrical. The fact that each poem
revealed the thoughts and feelings of someone other than the storyteller, or scop (the
singer who told the stories) would easily be able to take the feelings spoken of in the
text and tell them filled with the same emotion.

Another
way to examine this would be the fact that it did not happen to the scop. It is much
easier to tell a story which is not yours. The emotions revealed in all three of the
poems is, at times, gut-wrenching. It would take some distance from the poem to be able
to tell it without breaking down.

At the same time, one
last idea to examine, the wanderer and the seafarer are no longer "here." They have
moved on. Both have found peace with where they are and in their faith. That being said,
a scop would have no choice but to tell another's
story.

Poetically, all three contain very distinct elements
typical of the period. All three contain kennings (metaphorical phrases used to heighten
the language--make it more beautiful), alliteration (the repetition of consonant sounds
within a line of poetry--adds to the lyrical "voice" of the poem, and assonance (the
repetition of a vowel sound within a line of poetry--offers same lyrical "voice" as
alliteration).

Direct examples of these, from the poems,
are:

"Paths of exile" (meaning the ocean) from "The
Wanderer"- kenning example.

"Bark's bows" from "The
Seafarer"- alliteration example (the repetition of "b" in both
words.

"I make this song of myself, deeply sorrowing" from
"The Wife's Lament"- assonance example (the "o" sound in "song" and
"sorrow").

Is Friar Lawrence telling the complete truth in his speech in Act V scene 3?

This is an excellent question to consider. My short answer
to it is that he does tell the truth partly, but clearly he does not reveal the way that
he had rather arrogantly hoped to be the man responsible for healing the breach between
the two feuding houses of the Montagues and the Capulets. This question of course does
relate to a much bigger issue, which is to what extent is Friar Lawrence responsible for
the tragedy.

However, to focus on this speech alone, on the
one hand, Friar Lawrence openly confesses everything about what he had done and his own
role in the tragic events. He admits that he was the one to marry Romeo and Juliet and
that also he gave Juliet a sleeping potion and hoped to manage the reuniting of the
lovers. He does end his speech by saying that if he can be found at fault, then he
accepts any punishment that the state does give
him.

However, if we look more closely at what he says, we
could argue that he is trying to present himself in a way that lessens his guilt in the
case. Consider the following example:

readability="18">

You, to remove that siege of grief from
her,

Betrothed and would have married her
perforce

To County Paris. Then comes she to
me

And with wild looks bid me devise some
mean

To rid her of this second
marriage,

Or in my cell there would she kill
herself.

Note the way that in
this quote Friar Lawrence implicates the Capulets in the tragedy, accusing them with the
rather stark "You." He also presents himself as being forced into giving Juliet the
potion to stop her from killing herself, whereas, although Juliet certainly was suicidal
and desperate, we could argue Friar Lawrence was driven by thoughts of the glory that he
could achieve by broaching a peace between the two houses. So, the Friar is certainly
truthful on the whole, but we need to be aware of the spin that he puts on his version
of events and how this spin deflects blame.

What is a tight gap? Please provide the deifinition and an example.

Tight junctions are formed between adjacent cells of the
epithelia. The epithelial cells form a layer between a cavity and a mass of cells. For
example the lungs have an epithelia that acts as a layer between the mass of cells that
make up the lungs and the cavity filled with air.

The tight
junctions do not allow the passage of substances, through gaps between cells, into a
cavity. For a molecule to reach the cavity it is essential that it enters the cells and
then passes to the other side through it. The tight gaps also block the free passage of
integral membrane proteins between the portion of the cell exposed to the cavity and the
rest of the cell.

An example of tight gaps is that between
the epithelial cells of the lungs. Here, the tight gaps prevent the passage of the
growth stimulant heregulin that lies in the apical surface to the basolateral receptors
that are sensitive to it.

Is it true that the definite integral of x*f(x) = ((a+b)/2)*definite integral of f(x), where f(x) = a + b - x and the limits of the integration are...

It is given that f(x) = a + b -
x

`int_a^bx*f(x)dx` = `int_a^bx*(a + b -
x)dx`

= `int_a^b ax + bx - x^2
dx`

= a(b^2 - a^2)/2 + b(b^2 - a^2)/2 - (b^3 -
a^3)/3

= ab^2/2 - a^3/2 + b^3/2 - ba^2/2 - b^3/3 + a^3/3
...(1)

[(a + b)/2]`int_a^bf(x)dx` = [(a + b)/2]*`int_a^b(a
+ b - x)dx`

= [(a + b)/2]*[a(b - a) + b(b - a) - (b^2 -
a^2)/2]

=   a(b^2 - a^2)/2 + b(b^2 - a^2)/2 -  (b^3 + a*b^2
- a^2*b - a^3)/4

= ab^2/2 - a^3/2 + b^3/2 - ba^2/2 - b^3/4
- ab^2/4 - a^2*b/4 - a^3/4 ...(2)

(1) and (2) are not
equal.

It is not true that `int_a^b x*f(x)dx` = [(a +
b)/2]*`int_a^bf(x)dx`

What are the figures of speech used in A. E. Housman's "Terrence This Is Stupid Stuff"?I need this for a demo in our class : ,

I'll list the poetic devices Housman used, define them for
you, and give you a few examples. Then you can look for more on your
own.

Rhyme: the use of similar
sounding words, usually at the end of the sentence. It is very easy to identify the
rhyme scheme of this poem, because it is written as a series of couplets,
or two lines that rhyme. For instance, the first four lines
are:

‘TERENCE, this is stupid
stuff:

You eat your victuals fast
enough;

There can’t be much amiss, ’tis
clear,

To see the rate you drink your
beer.

So the rhyme scheme here is
AABB.

Consonance, or the
repetition of consonant sounds. For instance, in line 13, the letter m is repeated:
"Moping melancholy
mad."

Repetition, repeating
words or phrases: "The cow, the old cow, it is
dead."

Allusion, a reference
to history, literature, or mythology, appears in the last stanza with the tale of
Mithridates.

The tone, or the
feeling the author wants the reader to have, begins rather humorously with the speaker
poking fun at Terence's poetry: "But oh, good Lord, the verse you make,/ It gives a chap
the belly-ache." Then the speaker becomes serious and tells his
friend:

It should do good to heart and
head
        55
When your
soul is in my soul’s stead;

And I will friend you, if I
may,

In the dark and cloudy day.

This
is followed by the strange story of Mithridates, which serves as an object lesson that
sometimes when people set out to hurt you, they are actually hurting themselves
instead.

Mood is the feeling
the poem creates in the reader. You will need to decide what the mood is for
yourself.

How can we accurately use the term evolution to describe what we see now over time?

Evolution describes the way species change over time.  A
species will pass on the more desirable traits to its young.  Over time, this process
will change the species and help it adapt to its changing environment.  A common example
is the white moth.  Over time, humans began to pollute the area the white moth lived
in.  Instead of white being a camouflaging color, it made the moth stand out against the
dingy gray of the city.  Moths that were darker in color survived while the pure white
moths were eaten or destroyed by predators.  Thus, the white moth became the gray moth. 
We could watch, over time, as the species began to change.  This type of evolution is
constantly occurring all around us.  Plants and animals adapt with each
generation.

In the quote, Derozio uses the metaphor of a ship. What is its significance and relevance to "To India My Native Land"?Well—let me dive into the...

My country!
In thy days of glory past
A beauteous halo circled round thy
brow
and worshipped as a deity thou
wast—

The meaning (i.e.,
significance: meaning expressed), and thus the relevance (i.e., pertinence to subject),
of the quote you ask about lies in the quoted lines directly above. This sonnet--with
concatenated rhyme at lines 3-4 with 5-6 and 7-8 with 13-14, thematically connecting the
first two quatrains and the couplet--focuses on the past splendor and glory of India.
Then, the poetic speaker--presumably Derozio himself--determines a way to pay homage to
India's glorious past.

The three lines beginning "My
country!" reveal the glory that was India's, with India described as having a gold halo
around its personified brow, "A beauteous halo circled round thy brow." India's glory
was so great that it was worshipped as a deity. With colonization (not explicitly
mentioned but implied), the mighty "eagle pinion" (a metonymy and a literal pinion
feather) that was "tied down" in captivity is now seen "groveling in the lowly dust."
(This is a metaphorical allusion to falconry's imprisonment of birds of
prey.)

In the passage beginning "Well--let me dive," the
speaker declares how he will reclaim a small fragment of India's past glory and extol it
to the world. He presents this aspiration as a metaphor describing salvaging the
treasure from a ship wreck. This metaphorical allusion compares salvaging to the act of
writing the sonnet that will immortalize India's past splendor. This follows a
traditional sonnet theme immortalizing things the poet values, like love and beauty, in
the ink of a sonnet, such as in Shakespeare's Sonnet
63.

The relevance (i.e., pertinence to the matter at hand)
is that the speaker's native land will not go quietly into the oblivion of subjugation
in colonization. What concludes the sonnet is the speaker's declaration that his guerdon
(i.e. reward, recompense) shall be that some reader might grant "one kind wish" for his
immortalized India.

What are two good literature books with corresponding themes I could write about in a comparative analytical essay ?For a school assignment we have...

You might think about books which were written in response
to or imitation of each other. For example, Virgil's Aenid continues the story of the
character Aeneas who is known from the Iliad. Kate Chopin's The Awakening is a resetting
of Flaubert's Madame Bovary in the United States. Jean Rhys' The Wide Sargasso Sea tells
the story of Jane Eyre from the point of view of Bertha Mason. Derek Walcott's Omeros
transplants the Odyssey to the Carribean.

One way to look
for examoles would be to take a poem like the Homeric epics and look at works which
respond to it over the centuries from Virgil through the present. Tennyson wrote several
poems responding to Homer but shiftinbg time or point of view (Lotos Eaters, Ulysses,
etc) and recent feminists have done the same (see e.g. Atwood's Siren Song). Choose one
possible work and look at how it responds to an earlier work and the ways it is similar
and different.

what are the biological effects of radiation on body tissue?

Radiation causes the bonds between atoms to break. This
can create ions, which is why the term ionizing radiation is often
used in this context. As bonds are broken, large complex molecules like proteins and DNA
are damaged, which can have negative impacts on the cell's ability to function. Also, as
molecules break, smaller molecules and ions (sometimes called free
radicals) normally not found in the cell are produced, and they can create a
variety of problems. Free radicals are quite chemically active, and can disrupt the
bonds holding other nearby molecules together; for this reason, the effects of radiation
may continue long after the actual radiation has
stopped.

Far and away the biggest impact of radiation on
cells is in the disruption of DNA. When DNA is disrupted, the cell loses the ability to
create proteins needed for metabolism, and also loses the ability to repair itself. If
the damaged DNA is passed on to daughter cells by mitosis or meiosis, you can end up
with a whole group of cells that no longer function correctly.

According to Okun’s Law, how much output (real GDP) was lost in 2008 when the nation’s unemployment rate increased from 4.6 percent to 5.8...

Okun's Law is a relationship between the rate of
unemployment and real output. It can take several forms one of which is: change in the
employment rate = a + b*(real output growth).

The variables
a and b in the equation have to be determined from historical data. Okun's Law is a
statistical relationship rather than a structural feature of the economy. It has to be
revised regularly with the coefficients altered to reflect the macro economic scenario.
The Law can be used as a tool for forecasting change in real output based on the change
in unemployment.

Even if we have the increase in
unemployment rates from 4.6 to 5.8, it is not possible to plug in the values into the
law and arrive at the decrease in the real output growth as we need the values of a and
b from empirical data.

Can I find the molality of a solution if I have the molarity and the density?

Molality is a way of measuring the concentration of a
compound dissolved in a solution. If a solution has a molality of one, there is one mole
of the solute dissolved in one kilogram of the solution. Molarity on the other hand is
concentration expressed in moles per liter of the
solution.

If you have the molarity and density of a
solution you can calculate the molality of the
solution.

Let molality be denoted as M', M' = mol/kg and M
denote molarity, M = mol/liter

Density D =
kg/liter

M/D = (mol/liter)/(kg/liter) = mol/kg =
M'

The molality of a solution can be derived by dividing
the molarity of the solution by its density.

What color are Gabe's eyes?Jonas's eyes are pale, what about Gabe's?

One of the most important aspects of the story is this
link that Gabe shares with Jonas and the Giver. All three have light eyes, whereas the
others in their community have dark eyes. This connection is marked in a story with
themes such as Sameness and the individual versus society. This differentiation in eye
color is also a symbol--at the very least, it symbolizes their ability to see things
differently than others, which foreshadows Jonas' exodus from the community. It also
indicates another comment on life--that among all those that are the same, more will be
born who are unique, and change will be feasible.

Why did colonists dislike the Proclamation of 1763?

The colonists IGNORED the Royal Proclamation of 1763 more
than they simply "disliked" it. A number of aristocratic Americans, such as George
Washington and Benjamin Franklin, had enormous claims to land in that area, and hoped to
re-sell it for a profit. Since the Proclamation would have interfered with their right
to do so, they simply ignored it.

Additionally, since the
Proclamation put those who moved there away from any legal authority--somewhat as the
Pilgrims experienced by landing at Plymouth--they were under no authority, as well as
outside the reach of creditors. Many, such as Daniel Boone, moved to that area for no
other reason than to avoid creditors, since the law would not reach that area. Also,
with the population growing, the call of unclaimed land was to great to
resist.

So the colonists were not really "angered," nor did
this directly lead to the revolution. They simply ignored it, as they had earlier done
with the Navigation Acts. The only people to be truly "angered" were the Indians who
believed that the Proclamation would preclude further European settlement. They were of
course disappointed.

From Do the Right Thing, discuss how diversity is a source of strength and challenge at Sal's.

Like so much else in Lee's film, there is no easy answer
here.  On one hand, diversity is a source of strength in the restaurant as it helps to
make Sal's a part of the neighborhood.  In a particularly poignant moment between Pino
and Sal, he tells his son that he reveres the fact that his pizzeria has been in the
neighborhood for so long.  The fact that the neighborhood kids eat his food and have
consumed his food for so long is a source of pride for him and a representation of the
strength of diversity present.  Another instance where diversity possesses strength is
the bond between Mookie and Vito, where a man of color and a White man can share a
positive relationship.  To an even larger extent, diversity can be seen in Pino's love
of celebrity.  Pino loves "Magic, Eddie, and Prince," and this is a reflection of
diversity, albeit on a much smaller level.

Yet, diversity
might not be present in terms of diversity of thought.  The sequence where each member
of an ethnic group spouts off the cultural stereotype of another is a reflection of how
diversity can prove to be challenging.  Another instance of this would be Buggin' Out's
fundamental criticism of Sal's.  While he might have taken his claims to a bizarrely
intense level, the base has some merit.  Since most of Sal's customers are people of
color, it might be more representative to have "brothers on the wall."  It is a moment
where diversity proves to be challenging.  Finally, Mookie's throwing the garbage can,
precipitated by Sal's misapplication of anger towards Radio Raheem's radio, and the
intensity of seeing one of their own killed at the hands of police officers creates a
tableau where diversity can cause challenges, if not understood properly and if not
revered in an appropriate light.

What were the Metrical Romances?

Metrical Romance is another dual term for Chivalric
Romance.  (So, as you can see, I have a little different opinion than the educator
above.) Whether written in prose or verse form, Metrical Romances were incredibly
popular in Medieval Europe.  Wikipedia has a really nice summation when it reveals the "
emphasis on heterosexual love and courtly manners distinguishes it from ... other kinds
of epic, in which masculine military heroism predominates."  Therefore it is important
to stress that a Metrical Romance has more to do with courtly love and chivalry than it
does with heroism.

My very favorite of the Metrical
Romances is Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. Although I can't say
that courtly love is the "focus" of this Metrical Romance, I would say that the
interesting relationship between Sir Gawain and Lady Bertilak absolutely does have to do
with both honor, courtly love, and chivalry.  You see, Lady Bertilak tries to tempt Sir
Gawain every single night.  It is a pickle for Gawain because medieval courtesy asks
that Gawain succumb to this lady (the interim host while Lord Bertilak is away);
however, medieval chivalry asks that he honor the Lord of the House (who is not yet at
home).  Sir Gawain decided not to make love, but to at least give a kiss.  Sir Gawain
then equally kisses Lord Bertliak when he returns.

readability="5">

Of all the things that men may
heed
'Tis most of love they sing
indeed.

Thus, it is
especially fun when Metrical Romance actually conflicts with the chivalric
code!

How would you compare/contrast Because I could not stop for death by emily dickinson with Do not go gentle into that good night by dylan thomas?

The two works can be compared or are similar based on
their topic: death and its inevitability.   Although the two poems take an almost polar
opposite approach to death, the second poem also aknowledges death, although the speaker
of Dylan's poem is openly pleading with the reader to resist, or at least not make it
easy for "death" as it is personified, it also admits that Death is coming, and
inevitable.

The first poem, Dickenson's "Because ..." is
formulated from a passive and voluntary helpless point of view, as though Death is
something that happens to us, not something we can challenge or decide upon.  The tone
toward the subject is vastly different as well, the speaker in the first poem uses words
such as "kindly" and "civility", indicating that there is a passive politeness, or
perfunctory process involving death, but does not address whether or not the sould
should or should not resist, as in poem 2.  This is due to the fact that it is
established in the first few lines of the poem that whether or not to resist death is
moot, Death is personified as deciding to claim you when and where Death decides.  The
second poem also paralyzes the speaker into a sort of suspended sense of
reality:

"We passed the setting sun. Or rather, he passed
us;"

adding more to the "helpless" aspect of
dying.

Taken as a whole the sole similarities of the two
poems are the subject matter.   Beyond that they diverge in separate directions and are
told from different points of view, the first in a sort of indirect dealing with death,
by telling the reader to "fight" death, and the second as sort of narration of the
speaker's not so unpleasant experience through the journey that is
death.

Prove that if 'a' is a positive integer and the nth root of 'a' is rational, then the nth root of 'a' must be an integer.

It is given that a is a positive integer and the nth root
of a is rational. A rational number can be expressed in the form p/q where p and q are
integers.

a^(1/n) =
p/q

=> a = (p/q)^n

If p
is not an integral multiple of q, p^n is not an integral multiple of q^n, in which case
p^n/q^n cannot be an integer. But we have (p/q)^n = a which is an
integer.

Therefore p/q has to be an
integer.

This proves that the nth root of a
is an integer.

Analyze the minor characters in the story "Worn Path."Eudora Welty

The minor characters of Eudora Welty's "A Worn Path" are
those characters who are either part of the cause of Phoenix Jackson's setting forth on
the path to the clinic, along the way, or at the end of the worn
path.

Phoenix's
grandson

The pitiable "little bird" as
Phoenix describes him, is the driving force of the story; his condition is the
sole reason Phoenix tenaciously moves forth upon the path to the clinic in order to
obtain medicine.  More than a physical being, the grandson acts as a spiritual guide for
Phoenix; her love is what energizes her towards her goal.  In fact, some critics feel
that the grandson is dead already.

The
hunter

A stock character, the hunter acts
and speaks in a stereotypical manner.  The hunter is the Southerner with the rifle and
his dog, uncaring of anyone who comes along.  His remarks to Phoenix indicate his
attitude of superiority to the "old colored people" like Phoenix.  For instance, he
humorously asks her what she is doing on her back, helping her up.  But, while he gives
her assistance, his patronizing attitude toward her is apparent in his remark that
"colored people...wouldn't miss going to town to see Santa Claus."  He, then, turns his
attention to his dogs, about whom he is more concerned.  In another instance, of his
disregard for Phoenix, he tells her he would give her a dim, but he has nothing with
him, not realizing that Phoenix has already taken a nickle which has fallen from his
pocket.

The
nurse

The nurse plays an important role in
that she provides information to the readers and she effects the climax of the
narrative.  A stock character, too, like the hunter, the nurse treats Phoenix in a
condescending manner, as well:

readability="10">

"You mustn't take up our time this way," she
says, exasperated when the woman lapses into a spell of forgetfulness, "Tell us quickly
about your grandson, and get it
over."

Like the hunter, the
nurse represents the conventional opinion of blacks as inferior and not worthy of
attention and respect that would be given to persons of another
race.

What, according to you, does Aristotle mean by "pleasure proper to tragedy"?

In Aristotle's Poetics, he
says:

Those
who employ spectacular means to create a sense not of the terrible but only of the
monstrous, are strangers to the purpose of Tragedy; for we must not demand of Tragedy
any and every kind of pleasure, but only that which is proper to it. And since the
pleasure which the poet should afford is that which comes from pity and fear through
imitation, it is evident that this quality must be impressed upon
the incidents.

This is found
in Aristotle's first and most important "principle" of tragedy: plot.  A viewer of a
tragic play will, by the end, feel an aesthetic (artistic appreciation) pleasure in the
intricate plot which elicits a catharsis, a purgation of pity and
fear.

For example, by the end of Oedipus
Rex, we feel an appreciation for all the tragic ironies involving sight and
blindness, fate and free will, family love and incest, and truth and ignorance.  All of
these feelings are the result of a complex plot, a series of oracles, ironies, and
complications that, it seems, were destined for tragedy.  Ironically, we enjoy the facts
that Clytemnestra kills herself but Oedipus doesn't: it seems just to us.  We pity both
mother and son, and we fear that such corruption may befall our families as well.  So,
the pleasure comes at intersection of pity, fear, and appreciation of a plot that is
resolved tragically but deservedly.

When Abigail is alone with John, what claim does she make ?

Before the play begins Abigail worked for the Proctors- a
common job for unmarried women during the time.  When she is alone with John Proctor,
she makes several claims.  She claims that she and John were together intimately before
his wife fired her. He resists her flirting and suggests that this is not true, and if
it was their time together is now over and done with.  He decrees that he will "cut off
his hand" before thinking about reaching out towards her again.  This dismissal hurts
the young girl, who clearly still harbors feelings for her married former
employer.

Which groups of people tended to be loyalists, or British sympathizers, during the American Revolution?

Quakers, many Germans (because of the German connection of
the House of Hanover to which George III belonged(although ethnic Germans fought on both
sides of the revolution), recent Scotish immigrants tended to be Loyalists, as opposed
to earlier Scots and Scots-irish immigrants who tended to be rebels (Presbyterian
churches were often targeted by the British), more Blacks seeking freedom from slavery
joined the Loyalist cause than the Patriot cause, there was strong Loyalist sentiments
in southern colonies such as North and South Carolina and strong loyalist sentiment in
parts of New York , New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Perhaps as
many as 20% of the population were active loyalists.  Vicious civil war existed between
Loyalist and Patriot partisans in North and South Carolina the fighting continuing after
Yorktown until peace in 1783.  This involved the torture, rape, murder and robbery of
civilians by partisans of both sides.

People switched sides
during the war, and a large segment of the population wanted to stay out of the struggle
as much as they could.  Some captured British soldiers joined the Rebels, while some
captured rebels joined the Loyalist cause to avoid or get out of the horrible prison
ships.  The various fortunes of the Rebels and British forces in the war effected the
loyalties, which is typical of civil wars.

How is Rainsford a dynamic character in "The Most Dangerous Game"?I need an idea other than "He is a dynamic character because he is able to...

The definition of a dynamic
character is one who undergoes changes in his personality or attitude. By
the end of the story, Rainsford is truly a changed man. Where he earlier believed that
animals felt no fear or pain and had no understanding, Rainsford soon came to realize
that the hunted do experience the terror of being hunted. Revenge did not seem to be an
important aspect to him before becoming the subject of Zaroff's dangerous game, but when
he returned and encountered Zaroff in his bedroom, he soon resumed the hunt--this time
with Zaroff as the prey. Rainsford compromises his own sense of honor by continuing the
game, and he even seems to enjoy his new human prey, resting contentedly in Zaroff's own
comfortable bed after killing the Russian. Another change may also have overcome
Rainsford: He may have decided that hunting humans was not such a bad idea after
all.

What is the purpose of the second full paragraph (beginning "I was the attendant or page") of Chapter 47 of Herman Melville's Moby-Dick?

The second full paragraph of Chapter 47 of Herman
Melville’s novel Moby-Dick has a number of purposes and effects,
including the following:

• It emphasizes once more
  the friendship of Ishmael and Queequeg – a major theme of the
  novel.


• It emphasizes the idea of cooperation, equality,
  and mutuality between these two men, who serve on a ship dominated by a captain who is
  monomaniacal and who isolates himself from and above his
  men.


• There may perhaps be some humorous sexual
  connotations in the language of the second sentence. (Melville loves this kind of
  humor.)


• The calm, placid atmosphere here contrasts with,
  and thus helps highlight, all the action that will come later in the
  novel.


• This paragraph emphasizes Ishmael’s
  thoughtfulness, his tendency to meditate on things and engage in philosophical
  speculation.


• The paragraph explicitly emphasizes such
  major themes of the novel as Time and Fate (especially the
  latter).


• The theme of Fate, in particular, may be
  relevant to the role of Captain Ahab and especially of his relationship with his crew. 
  It is easy to think of the determined, relentless Ahab as
  an

readability="7">

unchanging vibration, and that vibration merely
enough to admit of the crosswise interblending of other threads with its
own.

• Ishmael,
  however, himself interprets the weaving as
  follows:

readability="8">

This warp seemed necessity; and here, thought I,
with my own hand I ply my own shuttle and weave my own destiny into these unalterable
threads.

This whole long
paragraph, then, can be seen as part of the novel’s larger meditations on the crucial
issue of fate and free will. It suggests that even as we make our own choices we find
ourselves caught up in and by larger forces over which we have no
control.

• The paragraph also offers thoughts on
  the role in life of mere chance (in addition to fate and free will), thus suggesting
  that the fabrics of our lives are affected by at least three different forces whose
  final results no one can really predict.


• This paragraph,
  then, helps contribute to the thought-provoking philosophical richness which is one of
  the great features of Melville’s stirring
  book.

How has nanoscience affected the human experience?

Nanotechnology was informally
invented by Richard Feynman in a talk given in 1959. The concept of manipulating
individual atoms was, at the time, almost inconceivable, but became prevalent in
science-fiction writing and so slowly entered public
consciousness.

Professor Norio Taniguchi formally defined
it in 1974:

readability="9">

'Nano-technology' mainly consists of the
processing of, separation, consolidation, and deformation of materials by one atom or by
one molecule.

Today, with
electron microscopes and micro-manipulation far advanced, certain actions are possible
while others are not. Many commercially available products that advertise nanotechnology
are merely existing technology with a buzzword attached. In public discussion,
Carbon Nanotubes are often mentioned as a solution for virtually
any problem without any understanding of what they are or how to apply them. At the
moment, nanotechnology is limited to very slow manipulation of materials. Molecular
machines are still in the future.

There is also the danger
of Gray Goo, a theory proposed by Eric Drexler; the theory states
that a group of self-replicating molecular machines will continue to replicate with the
Earth's mass until there is no life left. This theory is largely unproven but popular in
science-fiction.

A much greater issue is the damage
nanoparticles can cause in human tissue simply by being inhaled. Like asbestos, carbon
nanotubes in the lungs could cause
mesothelioma.

On the other hand,
nanotechnology has been used with great success in the medical field to selectively
deliver drugs without danger of overdose. Carbon nanotubes are also being used to
develop high-density computer storage systems, and nanoparticles are used extensively in
commercial coatings to improve surface smoothness by filling in the spaces too small to
detect with the eye.

Aside from the scare reports, which
sell papers, nanotechnology as a science is still in its infancy. Its impact on public
culture, at the moment, is mostly limited to theorizing and accidental misinformation.
Future impact will depend on cost-effective methods and safety issues. Advances in
medical science will likely precede other areas, leading to new treatment methods and,
hopefully, cures for cancer, AIDS, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, and any number of other
fatal diseases.

What were the advantages of the global expansion by Europe between 1500 and 1900?

Of course, most of the advantages of the European
expansion during this time period were felt by Europeans.  However, one can possibly
argue that there were some benefits to non-Europeans as
well.

Of course, European countries benefitted tremendously
from their expansion.  They gained huge amounts of wealth by exploiting their colonial
empires and by trading with countries they did not directly colonize.  For example, in
countries like Peru or Mexico, all the gold and silver that was extracted over the
course of roughly 300 years was sold or used for the benefit of
Spain.

To argue that this expansion helped non-Europeans is
harder.  One can make the case that European expansion spread European knowledge and
technology to other countries faster than would have happened otherwise.  One can also
argue that European forms of government are superior to the more "primitive" forms of
government that existed before the Europeans came.  However, both of these arguments are
somewhat shaky.  It is much easier to argue that the expansion helped Europeans than to
argue that it helped the natives of other continents.

What are some major differences between the original play of A Raisin in the Sun and its 2008 movie?

There are not many differences between the film and
Hansberry's work.  Part of the reason of this was that the director and the actors
simply revived the roles they were doing in their Broadway production of Hansberry's
work from 2004.  Outside of the obvious differences in translating any theatrical drama
to the screen, I think that one major difference was that Hansberry's work seems to
imply a great deal of doubt and insecurity that the 2008 film lacked.  There was an
evident "preachiness" or sense of the didactic in the 2008 version that was noticeably
missing from Hansberry's work.  Part of this might lie in the time period.  Hansberry's
work articulates a condition that is really uncertain.  At a time in American History
when Civil Rights was still a dream, when segregation laws in the South and covert
racism in the North were palpable, Hansberry's arguments were radical.  They were
groundbreaking because their assertions were rooted in the fundamental belief that doubt
and insecurity shrouded any hope of affirmation.  This is not as evident in the movie,
primarily because, of the time in which we live.  For better or worse, there is a
greater sense of racial equality now than back then, making Hansberry's claims seem more
didactic than what might have been their original intention.  The very fact that the
film can draw stars like Sean Combs is another indication of a different cultural
valence between the time of the film and Hansberry's context.

How would I draw a diagram to show the change in the retail coffee market that has resulted from cirucumstances described below?The days of the $3...

What you will need to do in this case is to draw a supply
and demand graph.  You will need to use the graph to show the change in the
market.

First, of course, you will need a graph
representing how the market used to be.  You will simply need to draw a supply curve and
a demand curve that intersect at some point (perhaps $3 per cup since that is the
equilibrium price mentioned in this question.

Next, you
will need to draw a second supply curve reflecting the changes that have happened in the
market.  The change that has occurred is a decrease in supply.  The reason for this is
that the cost of inputs for a cup of coffee (beans, rent, milk, transport costs) have
all gone up.  We know that, all other things being equal, an increase in the cost of
inputs leads to a decrease in supply.  So, you will need to draw a second supply curve
to the left of the original.

Once you have done this, you
will note that the equilibrium price of coffee has risen and the equilibrium quantity
(supplied and demanded) has gone down.  This is the change in the retail coffee market
that has occurred due to the changes mentioned in the question.

Please discuss the origins of the paw in "The Monkey's Paw."

The answer to this question can be found in the
conversation that Sergeant Major Morris and the Whites have soon after he enters. As the
Sergeant Major begins to tell the Whites about his experiences in India and shows them
the monkey's paw, the Sergeant Major tells them about its origins and how it came to
become magical:

readability="11">

"It had a spell put on it by an old fakir," said
the sergeant major, "a very holy man."

"He wanted to show
that fate ruled people's lives, and that those who interfered with it did so to their
sorrow. He put a spell on it so that htree separate men could each have three wishes
from it."

The Sergeant Major
goes on to confirm to the Whites that he has had his three wishes, though as he says
this, it is clear that the granting of wishes is something that fills him with terror
and fear. He also says that he gained the paw when the first owner of the paw wished for
death as his third wish. It is important to note the way in which such descriptions
effectively foreshadow the action that ensues when the Whites themselves try to cheat
their fate and suffer so terribly as a result.

In the second part of Roll of Thunder, Hear my Cry, T.J., a friend of Stacey's becomes the main focus. Why do you think Taylor did this?

Although his role does increase as the book progresses,
let us also not forget that T. J. also plays an important role at the beginning of this
story as well, as it is he that is responsible for the firing of Mary Longan. He is a
character that is presented as being seriously flawed, and is clearly somebody that
rejoices in the pain and discomfort of other characters. Although he does recognises his
faults and the wrongness of what he has done at various points in the novel, his
character remains fundamentally flawed, as is shown by the way that he is used and
abused by the Simms brothers. His attitude and behaviour causes both blacks and whites
to shun him. The second half of this book comes to focus on T. J. because he seems to
stand for the opposite of what the Logan family stand for: integrity, honesty,
independence and loyalty to his family group and circle. The sadness concerning T. J. is
that he never realises that he is being used by the Simms brothers and he is unable to
see through their pretence of friendship. Note how T. J. is presented in Chapter Ten,
which comes just before the murder that the Simms brothers
commit:

But T.
J. did not follow immediately. He remained standing in the middle of the compound, his
face puzzled and undecided. I had never seen him look more desolately alone, and for a
fleeting second I felt almost sorry for
him.

T. J.'s primary function
in the novel is therefore to show us the consequences of bad actions. T. J. does not
stay true to his community and is a self-serving individual. As a result, he is shunned
by his own people and used horrendously by the Simms brothers. Whilst his fate is of
course pitiable, it can be said that he brought it upon himself.

who is prithvi narayan shah?what work did he do?does anyone know?

Prithvi Narayan Shah, King of Nepal (1723–1775) the first
king of House of Shahs to rule Nepal. He is credited for starting the campaign for
unified Nepal, which had been divided and weakened under Malla confederacy. He was the
ninth generation descendant of Dravya Shah (1559–1570), the founder of the ruling house
of Gorkha. Prithvi Narayan Shah succeeded his father King Nara Bhupal Shah to the throne
of Gorkha in 1743. His mother name wasKaushalyawati.

King
Prithvi Nārāyaṇ Shah had sealed his border and maintained peaceful but distant relations
with the British, refusing to trade with them although he had accepted arms and advice
from them during his conquering wars. He died before he could effectively organize the
administration of his new country. He died in January, 1775, at the age of 52. Upon his
death, Prithvi Nārāyaṇ was succeeded by his son, href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratap_Singh_Shah">Pratap Singh
Shah

.

why all the foriegners invaded only india?

The first foreign invasion was of course the Aryans. 
Later you had the invasion of Alexander the Great.  The muslim invaders mentioned above
were able to integrate themselves over time into Indian culture and like the Aryans
became an integral part of Indian society.  India not only has the spices, minerals and
textiles mentioned above, but great fertile river valleys. It's agricultural potential
and riches were also part of the lure to invaders.  As  India became one of the centers
of human population and civilization from very ancient times, the human resources of the
subcontinent were also exploited by foreign invaders.

The
decline of the Mughal empire coincided with the global expansion of Europeans such as
the Dutch, Portuguese, French and most importantly the British.  They represented a
different kind of exploitation along a European colonial model, more interested in
imposing European cultural traditions rather than integrating into Indian society as in
earlier invaders.  The Indian sub-continent (Now Pakistan, India and Bangladesh) is a
vast geographic area, which very early became part of the East-West trade routes
(particularly sea routes) and Empires tended to expand along such
routes.

Is this book appropriate for a 5th grade female reader who is growing up Latina in Boston?

I think that with any work of literature, it is important
to ensure that proper instruction, formal or informal, accompanies it to guarantee
comprehension of concepts.  The information given about the student is a bit too vague,
so the only one that will be able to make this call is someone with a great deal of
insight.  There are some items to take into account.  On one hand, the book deals with
Esperanza's coming of age and much that goes along with it.  There are open discussions
of sexuality and victimization as a result.  There is a frank openness about how
individuals might not fit into the social order and what it means to be different from
others.  As with many books about girls' coming of age, it is something that addresses
how self- perception can be an awkward process and this might be something where
difficulty will arise in terms of questions being raised.  I think that there is a level
of accompaniment that will be needed with a work of this magnitude.  Fifth grade might
be a challenging time to start addressing the issues raised in the book, something that
presumes adolescence has already been well started.  Ethnicity is not the defining
element in reading this book.  I think that gender plays more of an essential role. This
is not saying that it should not be read, but the mature level of discussion that is
evident in the work has to be broached with a sense of guidance and caution in making
sure that adult accompaniment is present with the child reading it.  If this is not
there, I would not think that the book is something that can be easily read by a fifth
grader and grasped.

How are the Presidential system in the United States with the Parliamentary system found in most European democracies expressions of the unique...

There are many possible ways to answer this.  I would
suggest that you check in your text or your notes to see if there is one specific answer
that you are required to come up with.

I would argue that
the differences in these two systems reflect the fact that American political culture is
generally more suspicious of the government than European political cultures are.  The
United States began its existence with a rebellion against heavy-handed government and
the political culture of the country reflects that beginning.  Americans do not trust
their government and therefore do not want to put too much power in the hands of any one
person or political party.  For this reason, they set up a system in which the executive
and the legislative are separate from one another and can check one
another.

The American presidential system, then, reflects
the fact that Americans trust their governments much less than Europeans traditionally
have.

Why does James Thurber describe Walter Mitty as “undefeated and inscrutable to the last” in "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty"?

In Walter's daydreams, he is never a loser, as he appears
to be in real life. In his real world, he is timid and constantly in conflict with his
nagging, overbearing wife. He rarely (if ever) stands up to her complaints, instead
resorting to his daydreams to take him to a better place. In his fantasy world, Walter
is a daring pilot who guides his plane and the men inside to safety. He is a doctor who
successfully operates on a wealthy banker. On the witness stand, he brazenly defends
himself and ends up with a girl in his arms. He is a soldier who bravely prepares to
make a suicidal attack, one which he will probably survive. Finally, he happily faces a
firing squad--a far, far better fate than he faces in a lifetime spent as a hen-pecked
husband. He is undefeated in his fantasy world, always the conqueror who gets what he
wants. And he is "inscrutable": a man of mystery whose two worlds--one as a sheepish
coward and the other as a confident hero--will always contradict each
other.

How is the issue of dramatic representation explored in the Prologue of Act III in Henry V?

The notion of dramatic representation is one that the
character of the Chorus is devoted to, as his principal role seems to be to plead with
the audience to overlook the various limitations of the stage and how they are unable to
depict the various sights and scenes of the play. He thus asks the audience to exert the
power of their imagination to help them in the suspension of disbelief, to enable them
to see the various sights that he brings to life through his rousing orations. This
prologue is no exception, as the Chorus asks us to imagine the sight of a huge fleet of
ships embarking for France from England, and then brings us to the first of Henry's
sieges in Harfleur when he arrives there with his troops. Consider the following example
of how dramatic representation is referred to, and note the use of imperative verbs as
the Chorus compels the audience to use their
imagination:

readability="21">

Play with your fancies, and in them
behold

Upon the hempen tackle ship-boys
climbing;

Hear the shrill whistle which doth order
give

To sounds confused; behold the threaden
sails,

Borne with the invisible and creeping
wind,

Draw the huge bottoms through the furrow'd
sea,

Breasting the lofty
surge...

One of the roles of
the Chorus in this excellent example of a history play is to "fill in the gaps" as it
were of what the stage cannot show by imploring the audience to imagine those things
with the help of his powerful descriptions. Here, we are made to see the sight of the
fleet sailing towards France full of soldiers and ready to fight for Henry, even though
of course the stage itself would not have contained any ships. Dramatic representation
is therefore something that is related to the willing suspension of disbelief and the
way that the audience had to imagine the various scenes that the stage could not
depict.

What are the differences in manner between Judge Hathorne and Danforth?

There is not much in way of specific differences in both
judges.  Yet, one of the most striking is how they both seem to approach the questioning
of their power.  Hathorne does not take real well to anyone who should question the
procedures of the court.  The testy exchange between he and Corey is evidence of this. 
There is some level of personal animosity between them, something that Corey thinks will
be absent because of his own background with Danforth's father.  Yet, while there is a
personal element to Hathorne, Danforth sincerely believes, or purports to believe, that
the questioning of the court is not an attack on him as much as it is on the legal
condition of the trials, in general.  Danforth continually grills Proctor on his desire
to bring down the court.  Proctor, for his part, simply wishes to clear his name and
focus the trials on their weak evidential nature.  Yet, Danforth successfully goads
Proctor into admitting that there is another motivation in his questioning.  In this,
Danforth is shown to be more concerned with the overall nature of the court, something
into which he has absorbed his own identity, making him slightly different than Hathorne
in this respect.

In the monkeys paw, the monkey paw always grants what a person asks for, so why do people still fear and hate it?

Even though the Monkey's paw allows its owner three
wishes, it was not meant to be a blessing.  A spell was place on the monkey's paw by a
holy man.  According to the sergeant major, he "wanted to show that fate rules people's
lives, and that those who interfered with it did so TO THEIR SORROW." (pg 2)  Fate is
the force or power that predestines events in your life. . The sergeant major even tells
the White's that the first man wished for death as his third wish.  Mr. White did not
ask for anything evil or mean.  He wanted 200 pounds.  He didn't even need the 200
pounds.  He says he already had everything he needed.  But the curiosity got to him, and
he made his wish.  He did receive his 200 pounds, but at the cost of his son's life. 
The company paid him 200 pounds to compensate for the death of his son in their
machinery.  When he wished that his son return from the dead, who knows what would have
shown up at his door.  Edgar Allen Poe keeps us guessing on that
one.

Why aren't Antibiotics effective against Hepatitis B?

Hepatitis B is a viral liver
infection that affects more than two billion people worldwide. The virus is blood-borne
and fluid-transmitted, and inflames the liver, causing vomiting and occasional
death.

An Antibiotic or
Antibacterial is any substance that attacks or breaks down living
bacterial cells. These substances do not need to be organic in nature. Most human-used
Antibiotics are produced synthetically in laboratories, and are derived from substances
that were originally produced by microorganisms. A famous example is
Penicillin, which is produced by the
Penicillium fungus. Antibiotics are used as a selective poison to
kill some bacteria but not others.

Because Hepatitis B is a
Virus, it is unaffected by Antibiotics. A virus is not a living
cell or organism but a piece of DNA or RNA,
functioning by inserting itself into cells and rewriting their DNA or RNA structure.
Viruses have no metabolism and cannot reproduce without cells to invade. There is
nothing to "kill," so Antibiotics are not effective; viruses don't have the biological
structures that Antibiotics attack. In fact, taking Antibiotics while suffering any
viral infection can both kill beneficial bacteria, like Gut Flora,
and create Antibiotic-Resistant Strains of harmful
bacteria.

The current accepted methods of controlling
Hepatitis B include Vaccination, which prepares the immune system
to fight with a weakened strain of virus; Prophylactic Prevention
to avoid spreading the disease with sexual contact; Antiviral
Drugs, which have a limited effect; and Time, because
most healthy adults live through the infection with minimal liver damage. However, the
virus persists in the body and reactivates in about half of all
cases.

In Kate Chopin's novel The Awakening, what characters could be considered antagonists, and why?

In Kate Chopin’s novel The Awakening,
various characters might be considered antagonists, including the
following:

• Edna Pontellier becomes increasingly
  antagonistic toward her husband, Léonce. Léonce, it is true, antagonizes Edna in one of
  the early chapters of the book, when he returns home from a night of drinking and
  gambling and accuses her of paying insufficient attention to the children. He also
  antagonizes her later when, back in New Orleans, he accuses her of paying insufficient
  attention to her social responsibilities.  As the book develops, however, Edna becomes
  increasingly distant from, and antagonistic toward, her husband, as when she moves out
  of their home and also when she engages in romantic affairs with two other
  men.


• Those two other men – Robert Lebrun and Alcée
  Arobin, also have antagonistic feelings toward one another.  Robert, in particular,
  dislikes the free-wheeling, amoral, indeed even immoral Alcée. Robert distrusts Alcée’s
  interest in Edna


• Ironically, for part of the novel, Edna
  is in a somewhat antagonistic relationship with Robert, the man she thinks she truly
  loves. When Robert realizes that his relationship with Edna is becoming too serious, he
  leaves the immediate vicinity and goes to Mexico. This sudden decision on his part
  annoys and vexes Edna.


• As Edna’s friend, Adèle
  Ratignolle, begins to realize that Edna is growing too fond of Robert and that Edna
  later has begun an affair with Arobin, Adèle becomes a kind of friendly antagonist
  toward Edna.  It is largely because of warnings from Adèle that Robert decides to leave
  Edna, and it is Adèle who later warns Edna that she risks both her reputation and her
  relationship with her husband and children (especially the latter) if Edna continues her
  relationship with Arobin.


• Edna’s relationship with her
  visiting father, the Colonel, is not especially close, and although she gets along with
  him better than she had expected, he is an antagonist in the sense that he advises
  Léonce on her to handle women with proper masculine
  control.


• Ultimately, Edna comes to regard even her
  children as antagonists who may enslave
  her:

readability="6">

The children appeared before her like antagonists
who had overcome her; who had overpowered and sought to drag her into the soul's slavery
for the rest of her days. But she knew a way to elude
them.

• However, her
  larger antagonist (it might be said) is the social system of her period, which has
  helped dictate her marriage and the nature of her marriage and which is at the root of
  much of her sense of being constrained and
  unfree.

'Johnson appeals to common sense in dealing with a critical issue".With reference from "PREFACE TO SHAKESPEARE" DISCUSS THE ABOVE COMMENT.plz...

Actually, Samuel Johnson’s 1765 Preface to Shakespeare
fits into a tradition of presenting Shakespeare’s plays in modernized or more accessible
versions.  Treatises by John Locke, David Hume and Edmund Burke were extant at the time
Johnson produced his edition of the Bard; these earlier critics established a working
definition of a "common sense," which describes universal experience.  So Johnson was
adhering to an established rubric that assessed literature in "reasonable"
terms.

Johnson’s Preface echoes many neo-classical sentiments,
especially in his application of mimetic values, and in his axiom that “nothing can
please many, and please long, but just representations of human nature.”  Johnson also
states that “it is always a writer’s duty to make the world better, and justice is a
virtue independent on time or place.”   He notes that Shakespeare’s plays follow
Horace's miscuit utile dulce:  “The end of writing is to instruct; the end of poetry is
to instruct by pleasing.”  Most audiences expected and enjoyed this
principle.

to Johnson, Shakespeare does have several faults that do
not meet Enlightenment moral standards:    “He sacrifices virtue to convenience, and is
so much more careful to please than to instruct, that he seems to write without any
moral purpose.”  “To the unities of time and place he has shown no regard.”  In other
words, Shakespeare played too loose with classical precepts, and thus could not appeal
to the "common sense" of readers of Johnson's day.

Easiest art course onlineI have to take an Art course online for school credit, and I wanted to ask what's the easiest course to take?...

Drawing is the Easiest Art Course Online. You will learn A
major consideration that comes into play in drawing portraits is proportion and
perspective. To achieve a good likeness proportion is vital. If the person's eyes are
too close together, or if the mouth is too large, the drawing will not look like the
subject. So to get correct proportions, you're going to have to use your skill of
measuring objects with your pencil. You have to be really observant in your
measurements, too, because your own mind is going to really be fighting you and trying
to trick you. In portraiture you really have to draw what you see, and trust the
measurements you take regardless of what your mind tells you is
correct.

What is the importance in the ending of "The Destructors"?

You could argue that the answer to this question relates
to the class system in Britain and the impact that the war has had on it. Note the way
that in the last paragraph, the driver remembers the house that "stood there with such
dignity between the bomb sites like a man in a top hat." In Britain, top hats were worn
by those of the upper class, the privileged few, and thus we can take it as a symbol
representing the wealthy and dignified, and the class that had previously occupied a
position of supremacy.

By his laughter and his reaction,
the author of this excellent short story is thus suggesting that the impact of the war
and the alienation is has caused has weakened, if not destroyed, the respect and
deference that was once owed to the ruling classes.

can anybody give me explanation of these lines hereTis calm indeed! so calm, that it disturbs And vexes meditation with its strange And extreme...

Have you ever been in a place that was so quiet and so
calm that it was disturbing to you?  Colerdige, who was a good friend of Wordsworth
lived for a while near him in the lake district of England. See link.  It is a beautiful
place, out in the countryside.  In this part of the poem, Coleridge is sitting outside
with his child cradled at his side by a fire.  Everyone else in the family is asleep
inside the cottage. He is meditating  or thinking about life in general, but he finds
the quiet disturbing, inhibiting his meditation of life. Life is going on in the sea,
hills, and woods ---- insects, fish, birds, ----life in general, but it is going on so
quietly as to be inaudible (unable to be heard). HIs fire has gotten to the point of a
blue flame and is dying out and even the flame isn't moving.  The only sound is the
fluttering of a film on a grate nearby. 

Although
Wordsworth, Coleridge's good friend, loved the lake district, this was not a good time
for Coleridge.  He had been raised in the city, his marriage was failing, and he started
taking opium. When he left the lake district, his life was in shambles and he never
really recovered from it.  See link. 

Compare and contrast the main characters in "The Most Dangerous Game."

There are two main characters in The Most
Dangerous Game. They are: Sanger Rainsford and
General Zaroff.

Sanger
Rainsford is a big-game hunter of great repute. When the story opens he is traveling by
sea, and makes light of his profession:

readability="10">

"The world is made up of two classes -- the
hunters and the huntees. Luckily, you and I are
hunters."

...

"...I'm a
hunter, not a murderer."

He
finds this philosophy challenged by General Zaroff, who agrees with him in a much
broader sense: men fall into both categories instead of just one. His moral sense --
that man is not an animal to be hunted -- is repulsed by Zaroff's ideas, and he is
forced over three days to reevaluate both his philosophy and his morals. Although he
insists several times that hunting man is murder and he will not condone it, he sets
traps clearly intended to kill; Rainsford is a pragmatist, but only when he has no
choice. By the end of the story, Rainsford takes steps to kill Zaroff; he has other
choices, including stealing a boat or freeing Zaroff's slaves and taking him prisoner,
but he feels that Zaroff drove him to this position and must be eliminated. It is
possible that he becomes interested in the lifestyle itself; the final
line:

He had
never slept in a better bed, Rainsford
decided.

could be either a
well-deserved rest or an embrace of the luxury that Zaroff lived in. If it is the
latter, the change in his moral philosophy would have undergone an extreme
shift.

General Zaroff is both Rainsford's compliment and
polar opposite. He is a big-game hunter, a master of woodcraft and tracking, but he is
also an aristocrat, a lover of fine wines and good music. He enjoys speaking of writers
and poets, and feels that his heritage is as important as his chosen profession.
However, he is also an extreme sociopath, with no moral boundaries or qualms. He views
humanity as an animal on par with any other, only with the ability to reason instead of
acting on instinct.

readability="15">

"Life is for the strong, to be lived by the
strong, and, if needs be, taken by the strong. The weak of the world were put here to
give the strong pleasure. I am strong. Why should I not use my gift? If I wish to hunt,
why should I not?"

...

"It
gives me pleasure. They can reason, after a fashion. So they are
dangerous."

During the hunt
Zaroff shows his mastery of tracking and manages to avoid every one of Rainsford's
traps. His fatal mistake is overconfidence; he allows Rainsford to live no less than
three times to extend the hunt. This pursuit of his pleasure over pragmatism -- a trait
Rainsford exhibits -- is his downfall. Additionally, he cannot think that Rainsford
could be so persistent as to risk death, only to return and risk it again to challenge
him.

Rainsford and Zaroff are opposites morally, but in
their actions they are more alike than not. Each has a driving need to win, if for
different reasons, and each desires freedom: Zaroff from public persecution, and
Rainsford from Zaroff. If Rainsford, at the end of the story, has become his enemy, then
their only significant difference -- a defined moral compass -- has truly been
erased.

Who were the major economists of the 20th century most identified with laissez-faire economics?

There are many economists of the 20th century who are
identified with laissez-faire economics since laissez-faire is the idea that is most
adhered to by classical economists.  Some of the more famous names who have been
particular advocates of laissez faire include Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, and
Milton Friedman.

All of these men are well-known to
conservative economists.  They all strongly support the idea that the government should
stay out of the economy as much as possible.  Hayek, in fact, wrote a book entitled
The Road to Serfdom in which he warns that any serious moves away
from laissez-faire will lead to a move to socialism and ultimately to the destruction of
human liberty.

There are many other famous economists we
could name as supporters of laissez-faire, but these are three of the most
important.

What interference ("inference"?) can be created by the end of the story "The Most Dangerous Game"?

(When you say "interference," I assume that you actually
mean "inference.")

Author Richard Connell leaves several
questions unanswered at the end of his short story "The Most Dangerous Game." Why does
Rainsford decide to continue the hunt? Has he, like Zaroff, also become enamored with
the idea of hunting a human being? Or does he kill Zaroff out of a sense of revenge? We
can assume that revenge plays a major part in Rainsford's decision to turn the tables on
Zaroff and hunt him down, just as Zaroff had done with Rainsford. But when he did, it
became a case of murder, since Zaroff had already conceded, naming Rainsford the winner
of the game. Zaroff was a killer, but he was also an honorable man, and there is every
indication that he would have treated Rainsford hospitably after discovering him in his
bedroom. It also appears that Rainsford's satisfaction with Zaroff's comfortable bed
comes from something more than just a need for rest. Perhaps Rainsford's satisfaction
comes from having made his first kill of the most dangerous game of them
all.

what does Montag realize about how he will be changed from knowing Faber?from Fahrenheit 451

Faber has a tremendous effect on Montag.  Montag knows
that he must find himself a teacher, and that teacher is Faber.  Faber gives Montag a
device he has created, a small earpiece that allows him to listen to what is going on
and to respond to the person who is wearing the earpiece. He gave it to Montag because
Montag asked for support in dealing with Captain Beatty, who he knew could beat him down
mentally.  With this device Faber said he could help Montag and still remain safely at
home.  On the way to work that night, Montag feels terribly alone except for the voice
in his ear.  He suddenly realizes that

readability="13">

"... he was two people, that he was, above all,
Montag, who knew nothing, who did not even know himself a fool, but only suspected it. 
And he knew tht he was also the old man who talked to him and talked to him..." (pg
102)

He knew that the old man
would continue to talk to him as the days and nights passed
until.....

readability="16">

"His mind would well over at last and he would
not be Montag any more, this the old man told him, assured him, promised him.  he would
be Montag-plus-Faber, fire plus water, and then one day, after everything had mixed and
simmered and worked away in silence, there would be neither fire or water, but wine..." 
(pg 103)

He would be a
better, improved person, someone with quality.   Even as he was thinking these thoughts,
he could feel himself start his long journey.  He knew that eventually he would look
back on the person he was and know him to be a fool.

The
page numbers may differ depending on the version of the book you are reading.  However,
they should be found in the vicinity of the pages listed.

In the Old English poem Beowulf, what traits of Beowulf and Grendel raise the fight between them to an epic struggle bwtween two great opposing...

In the Old English epic poem Beowulf,
the fight between Beowulf and Grendel is a truly “epic” struggle in several senses of
the word. The fight is not a fight simply between two individuals but between two
symbolic forces.  This is true in several different ways, including the
following:

• Grendel is plainly identified as a
  symbol of evil, and Beowulf is just as clearly identified as a symbol of goodness and
  virtue.


• Grendel is plainly associated with forces of
  supernatural evil, such as Satan, whereas Beowulf is just as
  clearly identified with symbols of supernatural goodness, especially the Christian
  God.


• Both Grendel and Beowulf possess uncommon strength;
  each contains enormous power within his grip, so that each of them is not simply a
  common creature but something truly uncommon and supernatural in his
  powers.


• Grendel is bent not simply on killing single
  individuals but apparently on eradicating the whole Danish nation.  His attacks on the
  Danes continue for twelve years, and his impact on their entire culture is devastating.
  Likewise, Beowulf fights not merely on his own behalf but on behalf of the whole Danish
  nation and also on behalf of the glory of his own people, the
  Geats.


• Beowulf clearly sees Grendel as a hellish creature
  and vows to defeat Grendel not to enhance his own personal glory but to honor God and
  restore the proper moral order.  In other words, he fights for principles, not to win
  personal fame.


• Beowulf puts his trust utterly in God, so
  that the battle between Beowulf and Grendel is, in a sense, a struggle between Grendel
  and God’s representative on earth. If Grendel had defeated Beowulf, the people’s
  confidence in the Christian God might have been further shaken. Thus it is not
  surprising that as Grendel realizes that he is about to die, the poet remarks that this
  creature who

readability="7">

. . . had given offense to
God

found that his bodily powers failed him. (810-11;
Seamus Heaney
translation)

• Beowulf
  is “granted” by God “the glory of winning” (817-18). The fight between Beowulf and
  Grendel is a fight of huge symbolic importance with huge practical consequences for many
  beings besides themselves.  In all these ways, then, it is truly an “epic”
  struggle.

what would your speech be? if your were Banquo's ghost and the knights can see you what would u say?If you were Banquo's ghost and you were able...

Well, the question is very interesting. If  such a speech
were to be addressed in modern english, it would be something like
this:

My dear lords and knights. You can see my blood
boltered head and be forced to think as to what has happened to me. Let me give you a
shock. I am no longer Banquo but his ghost who has returned to be a part of the Banquet
where I was supposed to be the Chief Guest.

The man you see
here is a murderer and a tyrant who , to fulfill his desire to be the king of Scotland,
murdered his own cousin, the gracious Duncan. In order that there are no opponents in
his way, he put the suspicion on the innocent sons of Duncan. He got me murdered while I
was returning to the castle with my son. His draconian regime has brought about the ruin
of the country and no one is safe and secure as long as he remains the kingnof this
great country. If you do not believe me, you might catch the man who just came to meet
him a little while ago. He was the one who had been planted by Macbeth to get me killed
on the way.

 Before this man brings about more harm, I
request you all to take the law into your hands and give him a taste of his own medicine
and save the country.

"Mrs. Mallard is a callous woman regarding her husband's death." Discuss with reference to "The Story of an Hour."

What an excellent question to consider! Of course, there
are two ways of looking at this. On the one hand, you could argue that the way in which
Mrs. Mallard so quickly shifts from grief to joy about the state of freedom in which she
finds herself is rather callous. She thinks more about herself than about her husband,
which could be used as evidence to indicate that she is callous. We aren't actually told
anything about their relationship together and if Mr. Mallard mistreated her, but
perhaps we can infer from the silence devoted to this topic that theirs was a normal
marriage with Mr. Mallard trying to do his best as a husband. If this is true, then we
can argue that Mrs. Mallard is rather callous. Any love that she does feel towards her
husband is replaced by this sudden epiphany:

readability="8">

What could love, the unsolved mystery, count for
in face of this possession of self-assertion which she suddenly recognised as the
strongest impulse of her
being?

Certainly, if you look
at this quote in one light, Mrs. Mallard appears to be rather self-absorbed and selfish,
focusing on her own feelings and life rather than considering her husband and his
passing.

However, if we consider that this story isn't
about Mr. Mallard and Mrs. Mallard, but is about the state of society at the time of
writing and the kind of patriarchal dominance that men were given, this helps us to see
things differently. Consider the following quote that comments upon the state of
marriage and the relations between the genders at this
time:

There
would be no powerful will bending hers in that blind persistence with which men and
women believe they have a right to impose a private will upon a fellow
creature.

This, then, to Mrs.
Mallard is what she has escaped thanks to the death of her husband. His passing away has
given her freedom from having her will "bent" and given her the opportunity to live for
herself. If we understand this presentation of marriage, then the response of Mrs.
Mallard looks a lot less callous and much more understandable.

What modifies proteins chemically, then repackages them? Golgi apparatus or endoplasmic reticulum?

The Golgi apparatus modifies proteins chemically and then
repackages them.

The Golgi apparatus has been described as
the shipping department for the cell's products. The Golgi apparatus receives newly
produced proteins from the endoplasmic reticulum and changes them chemically. It then
sorts and packages these proteins and readies them for transport outside of the cell or
another location in the cell. The Golgi apparatus looks like a series of membranes that
form a ribbon-like structure. The Golgi apparatus and the endoplasmic reticulum are part
of the endomembrane system which also includes vacuoles, lysosomes, the nuclear
envelope, and the plasma membrane.

Why is Charles Olson's poem "The Kingfishers" considered an experiment in both language and in visual effect on the page?

Since Olson’s poem is famously difficult and puzzling, and
since I claim no great knowledge of the work, I thought it might be helpful to you if I
simply reported what a few students of the poem have said about its language and visual
design.

Charles Bernstein, for instance, writes that
a

stirring,
iconic voice rises up in this poem, one phrase tumbling upon the next, hectoring,
charged, bursting through the dead silence and complacency often associated with [a]
proto Cold War moment in U.S.
history.

Bernstein thinks
that the language of the poem challenges the conformist attitudes of the time. According
to Bernstein,

readability="7">

The poem is a bracing test of nonlinear reading:
because it quickly loses the reader trying diligently to
“follow,”

so that its
language demands multiple re-readings that never resolve into absolute clarity, at least
in Bernstein’s view.

Thomas F. Merrill notes that the poem
has been read both as a polemic (against the kind of poetry written by T. S. Eliot) and
as a parody (also of Eliot’s verse), although Merrill himself suggests that both of
these approaches to the language of the poem are inadequate. Merrill himself, however,
offers such a very detailed reading of the poem that it would be difficult to summarize
it here.

Daniel Belgrad, who considers “The Kingfishers” to
be a “dialogic poem,” argues that the work is a

readability="6">

chain of associations that progresses into the
past. The narrator thinks back after a moment of awakening from a troubled
night.

Stephen Fredman notes
that the poem

readability="6.1188811188811">

consists of many short poetic
units, whose continuity with one another can be hard to detect.
(http://tinyurl.com/3vvpsy4
[ href="http://tinyurl.com/3vvpsy4">Open in new
window])

Meanwhile,
Edward Halsey Foster suggests that the poem is indebted, in its shapes, both to
ideograms and to the process of making collages,

readability="5.0442477876106">

which bring seemingly unrelated
material into a new resolution. 
http://tinyurl.com/3hxwbhb
[ href="http://tinyurl.com/3hxwbhb">Open in new
window]

What are the Islamic sects?

The two most important sects in Islam are the Sunni and
the Shi'a.  The split between these two sects dates back almost to the very beginning of
Islam.

At the death of the Prophet Muhammad, the two sects
developed over the issue of who would succeed the Prophet.  The Sunni decided to follow
Abu Bakr.  They felt that the leader of Islam should be the person most qualified to
lead.  The Shi'a chose to follow Muhammad's son in law, Ali.  They felt that the leader
of Islam should be should come from within the Prophet's family. This led to the
creation of what are now rather different sects of
Islam.

Sunni and Shi'a share the same basic beliefs that
make them both Muslim.  However, they disagree on a number of details.  Perhaps most
important is the disagreement over sources of religious authority.  Shi'a believe that
there should be individual leaders (Imams) whose authority comes directly from God. 
They venerate past Imams as saints.  Sunni do not believe
this.

There are other, much smaller sects as well as splits
within the Sunni and the Shi'a.  However, these are the major divisions in
Islam.

In "The Interlopers," what is the catalyst that causes Ulrich von Gradwitz to change?

If we look at the story, we can see that it is the rather
unfortunate situation that Ulrich von Gradwitz finds himself in that leads to his change
of heart. The way in which a tree crashes down on both of them, trapping them and
pinning them to the floor seems to change everything. For Ulrich von Gradwitz, his
change comes about when he manages to free his arm and get to his wine flask so that he
can drink some of it. Notice what he thinks as he has something to
drink:

...the
wine was warming and reviving to the wounded man, and he looked across with something
like a throb of pity to where his enemy lay, just keeping the groans of pain and
weariness from crossing his
lips.

It is therefore when
Ulrich is able to drink and to appreciate the benefits of a bit of wine that causes him
to look at his enemy and to feel pity for him in his plight. Being trapped in a
compromising position with his enemy is therefore the catalyst that causes Ulrich von
Gradwitz to change his views regarding his adversary.