In The Godwulf Manuscript, although Parker creates Spenser in the mold of Spade and other early hard-boiled characters, Spenser is also very much a...

Hard-boiled detective fiction grew from roots in pulp magazines. Writers working in this genre seek realism, but their works are often sensationalist, full of sex, violence, and, in some cases, raw language and/or slang. Detectives often find themselves tumbling into lurid situations, and drugs or drinking are very common.

All of these are definitely present in The Godwulf Manuscript. There's casual violence--Dennis, the college would-be thug who swings on Spenser for encroaching on his woman--and more serious violence, such as the death of the same character (Dennis).

Spenser only fully departs from the hard-boiled tradition later in the series, but you can identify points in this novel which signal Spenser's later characteristics. Some of these are visible early in the book: Spenser's wit ranges more widely and actively than most hard-boiled detectives.

Spenser's reading habits are also quite broad, and though these habits really evolve later in the story, one thing that sets him apart is his understanding of literature, art, and history.

Finally, Spenser is much more reflective than the hard-boiled detective, even doubting his own meaning at times.

What motivates Ulrich's change of heart, and does this change reflect internal or external conflict in "The Interlopers"?

Ulrich von Gradwitz's change of heart is motivated initially by his struggle against nature, which is an external conflict, and then by his conflict of conscience, an internal struggle.

While von Gradwitz is patrolling his coveted strip of woodland in search of the "poacher" Georg Znaeym, whose family has never accepted the court ruling that this land no longer belongs to them, Ulrich suddenly comes face-to-face with his mortal enemy. In that brief moment of civilized hesitation before shooting each other, a force of Nature creates an external conflict for the men when lightning strikes the huge beech tree under which they stand. Suddenly, they are pinioned beneath large, heavy branches.
While they lie victim to the force of the storm, each hurls curses at the other. Eventually, though, "[b]oth had now given up the useless struggle to free themselves from the mass of wood that held them down."

Ulrich struggles to free one arm enough to pull a flask of wine from his outer coat pocket. He decides to offer some of this wine to his foe, adding, "Let us drink, even if tonight one of us dies." Georg Znaeym refuses this offer. Nevertheless, Ulrich von Gradwitz further engages in his internal conflict as he places the feud into perspective with their life-and-death struggle in the coveted woods.

An idea was slowing forming in his brain. . . In the pain and languor that Ulrich himself was feeling, the old fierce hatred seemed to be dying down.

Finally, Ulrich von Gradwitz tells Georg Znaeym that he has been lying there thinking about their dispute, and he now realizes they both have been rather foolish because there are much better goals in life than to win a boundary dispute. He proposes,

"Neighbor, if you will help me to bury the old quarrel, I—I will ask you to be my friend."

After a long silence in which Znaeym ponders this proposal, Georg agrees, chuckling at how the people in the region would stare if the two men should ride into the market together after all the years of their animosity. Thus, their internal conflicts are resolved. Unfortunately, the external one with the forces of nature is lost when, rather than either of their hunting parties arriving, their shouts have beckoned other "interlopers": roaming wolves.

Explain "The Pitfalls of National Consciousness'" by Frantz Fanon.

"The Pitfalls of National Consciousness" was one chapter of The Wretched of the Earth, a revolutionary book about imperialism, decolonization, and their effects on colonial peoples. Basically, Fanon argued that colonial governments fostered, usually deliberately, inequalities in their colonies. In particular, a class of colonial elites emerged with close ties to the mother country--usually educated there--and received positions of prominence in the colonial government. Once independence was achieved (and this colonial bourgeoisie was typically at the center of independence movements) they became the leaders of the new nation. Through their connections, education, and familiarity with European ways, they would gain wealth and even more influence, offering investment opportunities to European capitalists. They would siphon off some of this wealth for themselves, solidifying themselves as the elites. These same people, as national leaders, were the ones responsible for the emergence of what Fanon called a "national consciousness" that in turn made their wealth and power possible. So over time, the emergence of a national consciousness, promoted by  a wealthy, Western-educated class, would lead to the exploitation of the poor people of these new nations--a situation not materially different than colonialism itself. In fact, Fanon argues, national consciousness can lead to dictatorship as "[p]rivileges multiply and corruption triumphs, while morality declines." Only be focusing on the well-being of all the people could a former colony avoid this fate.

`dy/dx = (1-2x) / (4x-x^2)` Solve the differential equation

`dy/dx = (1-2x) / (4x-x^2)`

This differential equation is separable since it can be written in the form

• 
  `N(y)dy =M(x)dx`

Bringing together same variables on one side, the equation becomes

`dy=(1-2x)/(4x-x^2)dx`

Taking the integral of both sides, it turns into

`int dy = int(1-2x)/(4x-x^2)dx`

`y+C_1 = int(1-2x)/(4x-x^2)dx`

`y+C_1= int (1-2x)/(x(4-x))dx`

To take the integral of right side, apply partial fraction decomposition.

• `(1-2x)/(x(4-x)) = A/x + B/(4-x)`

• 
  `1-2x = A(4-x)+Bx`

Let x=0.

`1-2(0) = A(4-0)+B(0)`

`1=4A`

`1/4=A`

Let x=4.

`1-2(4)=A(4-4)+B(4)`

`-7=4B`

`-7/4=B`

• `1/(2x-x^2) = (1/4)/x + (-7/4)/(4-x)`

• 
  `1/(2x-x^2) = 1/(4x) + (-7)/(4(4-x))`

• 
  `1/(2x-x^2) = 1/(4x) + (-7)/(-4(x-4))`

• 
  `1/(2x-x^2) = 1/(4x) + (7)/(4(x-4))`

So the integrand at the right side decomposes to

`y + C_1 = int (1/(4x) + 7/(4(x-4)))dx`

Then, apply the formula `int 1/u du = ln|u| + C` .

`y + C_1 = 1/4ln|x| + 7/4ln|x-4|+C_2`

Isolating the y, the equation becomes

`y= 1/4ln|x| + 7/4ln|x-4|+C_2-C_1`

Since C1 and C2 represent any number, it can be expressed as a single constant C.

`y = 1/4ln|x| + 7/4ln|x-4|+C`

Therefore, the general solution of the given differential equation is `y = 1/4ln|x| + 7/4ln|x-4|+C` .

What does it mean to say that exchange rate pass-through is incomplete or complete?

Exchange-rate pass-through is the effect that when the international market changes so that a country's currency changes in value relative to others (the exchange rate), it will also affect prices within that country's economy (it "passes through").

Complete pass-through would mean that the change in exchange rate is directly tied to the change in local prices---if the dollar becomes 1% more valuable in international markets, prices will become 1% lower within the US. This almost never happens.

Incomplete pass-through is what actually occurs: Only part of the exchange rate change is reflected in local prices. Sometimes it's a large portion, close to complete pass-through; but usually it's a very small portion.

In fact as the papers I've linked show (be warned, they're actual peer-reviewed economics literature, so they are quite advanced), exchange-rate pass-through is so incompleteit's actually a bit of a mystery. It makes sense for a big rich country like the US; but even tiny poor countries like Nicaragua still see only very weak pass-through of their exchange rates. Something is in effect "shielding" local prices from international exchange rate changes.

What is D-Day?

D-Day is June 6, 1944. It was on this day that the Allied invasion of France began in World War II.

The Allies had a plan for defeating the Axis Powers in Europe and in North Africa. First, the Allies wanted to liberate North Africa from Axis control. Then, the Allies would invade Italy. The Allies also wanted to secure the Atlantic Ocean. With new technology such as radar and sonar, we were able to locate German submarines. This helped the Allies to make the Atlantic Ocean more secure. After Italy was defeated, the Allies wanted to liberate France. Finally, the Allies planned to invade Germany.

D-Day was scheduled for June 5th. However, because of bad weather, the June 5th invasion was pushed back one day to June 6th.  On this day, the Allies invaded Normandy. Allied troops landed on the beaches of Normandy. There were many, many casualties in these battles. Eventually, the Allies secured the beaches and began to liberate France. Later, Germany was defeated, and World War II ended in Europe.

There are many military cemeteries in Normandy because of the enormous number of casualties that occurred in the fighting as the Allies secured these beaches and the land in Normandy. D-Day is a day that is not forgotten.

How are Macduff and his family important to the play Macbeth?

Macduff is important to the plot because he is the one who eventually kills Macbeth. His family is important because Macbeth sent the murderers that killed Macduff's family. This was one of Macduff's motivations to fight Macbeth.

Macbeth believed Macduff suspected Macbeth had killed Duncan. By this time, Macbeth was getting very paranoid. With hired murderers, Macbeth killed Banquo and tried to kill Banquo's son Fleance. Macbeth did not stop there. He sent the assassins to the Macduff house, where they killed his family.

When Macduff finds out, he is overcome with grief. He tells Malcolm, who tells him that he needs to be a man.

MACDUFF

… All my pretty ones?
Did you say all? O hell-kite! All?
What, all my pretty chickens and their dam
At one fell swoop?

MALCOLM

Dispute it like a man.

MACDUFF

I shall do so;
But I must also feel it as a man:
I cannot but remember such things were,
That were most precious to me (Act 4, Scene 3). 

Basically, Malcolm is telling Macduff that instead of crying over his family, he should avenge their deaths. Macduff is supporting Malcolm, the king’s heir, who left when his father died but also raised an army to fight Macbeth. Macduff figures he has his best chance of defeating Macbeth by aligning with them. 

Macduff is important because the witches told Macbeth that no man born of woman could kill him. Macbeth interprets that to mean he is invincible. He learns that this prophecy, like the others, is tricky. Macduff gives Macbeth some surprising news as they fight:

MACBETH

… I bear a charmed life, which must not yield,
To one of woman born.

MACDUFF

Despair thy charm;
And let the angel whom thou still hast served
Tell thee, Macduff was from his mother's womb
Untimely ripp'd. (Act 5, Scene 8) 

Macduff was born by Caesarian section, so he is technically not born of woman. After this, Macbeth sort of loses his confidence. It is fairly easy for Macduff to behead him, therefore ending Macbeth’s reign of terror and proving you should not always listen to prophecies.

What quote from To Kill a Mockingbird tells me where Stephanie Crawford's house is?

Stephanie Crawford is a neighbor of Scout’s who lives next door to Miss Maudie across the street.

Miss Stephanie Crawford lives on Scout’s street.  She is close enough to the Finches’ house that they can sometimes hear her laugh when they are walking down their street (Ch. 6).  Her house is on the other side of Miss Maudie’s house, because the fire truck parks in front of it when Miss Maudie’s house is on fire (Ch. 8).  Miss Maudie’s house is across the street from Scout’s house (Ch. 8).

The best quote for where Miss Stephanie's house is actually tells us where Miss Maudie's house is, when Scout is discussing Miss Caroline.

She boarded across the street one door down from us in Miss Maudie Atkinson’s upstairs front room, and when Miss Maudie introduced us to her, Jem was in a haze for days. (Ch. 2)

Miss Stephanie Crawford is described as the “neighborhood scold.”  Scout much prefers the company of Miss Maudie to Stephanie Crawford.

The neighborhood is very interconnected.  Scout mentions Miss Stephanie Crawford constantly.  The neighbors are close.  When Scout and Jem are attacked by Bob Ewell and saved by Boo Radley, the description of the conversation on the Finches’ front stoop demonstrates also how close all of the houses are. 

Mr. Tate’s boot hit the floorboards so hard the lights in Miss Maudie’s bedroom went on. Miss Stephanie Crawford’s lights went on. Atticus and Mr. Tate looked across the street, then at each other. They waited. (Ch. 30) 

Miss Stephanie is very opinionated.  She seems to know all of the neighborhood gossip.  Since she sticks her nose in everything, it is very hard to avoid her.  Scout finds her frustrating because although she is a source of news, she sometimes teases Scout.  Miss Maudie never teases her.  She treats her with respect, more like a grown-up.

What is the rule of law?

The rule of law refers to the concept that people should be ruled by laws, not by arbitrary impulses on the part of their leaders.  In a society that is ruled by the rule of law, a law states that an act is a criminal act, while in a society that is not ruled by the rule of law, a ruler can decide on one day that an action is criminal and on the next day that it is not criminal. This  would be a dreadful society to live in.

There are some necessary corollaries to the rule of law. One is that the laws must be known to everyone.  If there are secret laws, anyone could run afoul of them, and this would not be the rule of law.  Imagine trying to play a game and not knowing what the rules were.  Another is that laws must be prospective, so that a person who committed an act a year ago is not punished for it, having had no reason to think it was a criminal act.  Still another necessity is that the law be applied equally to everyone, with people not getting off easily because they know a judge or are friendly with a king or because the accused is the king. Finally, the rule of law requires that the laws themselves be enacted in a way that is not arbitrary, in another words, in a democratic process that is meant to enhance the society, not arbitrary law-making that is meant to advance the interests of one or the few. 

The fact that a society has laws does not mean it is operating under the rule of law. It is in these corollaries that the operation of the rule of law exists and succeeds. 

In A Wrinkle in Time by Madeleine L'Engle, what does Meg have to do break the spell of the dark thing?

Meg has learned that she cannot break IT’s power over Charles Wallace by mere brute force. This has a limited effect on Charles Wallace, breaking his concentration for only a minute. She remembers that Mrs. Whatsit gave her the gift of her faults, so she tries to figure out how her flaws can help her in this situation. Her impatience has made her persistent, willing to return to Camazotz to rescue Charles Wallace, even though her father is close to giving up. It is the simple yet complicated act of loving Charles Wallace that rescues him. Meg realizes that this is the one thing that IT cannot understand, the unselfishness of love toward someone else. It has tried to spread “peace” by convincing everyone on Camazotz to be “like” everyone else. There is peace through “uniformity.” Yet it is not the same. Similarity is not the same as being identical. It is through the uniqueness of love for the flaws in ourselves and our self-sacrifice for someone else that can overcome evil.

Why do Lyddie's roommates caution her about Diana?

Lyddie's roommates warn her that Diana might be a dangerous person to be associated with, because she is a vocal proponent for better working conditions.  

Very few of the girls disagree with Diana's desire to get better working conditions in the factories.  Several girls even think of themselves as slaves, so it makes sense that they would support Diana . . . in spirit.  However, if Lyddie or any of the other girls publicly align themselves with Diana, they are risking their jobs and their paychecks.  Factory owners want to make as much money as possible.  That means work the girls as long and hard as possible for as little pay as they can get by with.  The owners maintain this power by threatening to blacklist any worker who causes too much trouble.  Diana is one of those women.  She even organizes meetings and circulates a petition to be signed by the girls.  Diana has her heart in the right place, but Lyddie is risking her own job by being close to Diana.  

How does Freak change Maxwell from living in a "vegetative state" to taking on daily quests? What is their daily routine?

In short, Freak changes Max from being "vegetative" to being imaginative through his suggestions for quests inspired by Freak’s love of reading.  Before Freak and Max become friends, Max spends much of his time in his basement “down under” watching television.  After the two become friends (which happens when Max helps Freak get his toy down from a tree), Kevin creates many imaginative quests and shows up at Max’s house with plans already made.  This is the general “daily routine” that you mention within your question.  In fact, every morning, Freak appears under Max’s window and yells the following words:

Get outta bed, you lazy beast! There are fair maidens to rescue! Dragons to slay!

This is always the beginning of the quest for the day (which originates from Freak’s fondness for King Arthur and his knights).  One good example is the day that the two investigate a “treasure” found in the sewer. The “treasure” is actually an old purse that Freak insists belongs to a “damsel in distress.”  The two retrieve the purse using a “device” that Freak makes.  Then they deliver the purse to Loretta Lee, the owner.  Another example is the quest to escape from Blade and his gang after they bully the two boys at the fireworks show on July 4.  This is the time when Max first puts Freak on his shoulders and the two children escape together.  The next example of a quest involves going to the hospital to see the “Medical Research” unit.  Freak insists that this is where his bionic body is being created.  The final piece of evidence that Max has truly changed as a result of Freak's imagination is that Max succeeds in writing a book about their quests after recovering from the tragedy of Freak's death. 

In The Wednesday Wars by Gary D. Schmidt, why does Holling tell Mr.Goldman that he no longer wishes to play the part of Ariel?

Holling does not want to play the part of Ariel, because Holling is a seventh grade boy.  Ariel is an unbecoming character to a young adolescent male, because Ariel is a fairy, and Holling thinks that being a fairy is a part for a girl.  In fact, even Meryl Lee thought it was a part for a girl.  That is why Holling tells Mr. Goldman that he can't play Ariel.    

Let me tell you, it is not a good thing for a boy from Camillo Junior High to play a fairy.

Mr. Goldman will not hear any of Holling's arguments though.  Then Holling is given his costume, and that is when Holling really does not want to play Ariel.  Not only is Holling going to play the part of a fairy, but he has to do so while wearing a costume comprised of yellow tights with white feathers on the butt.  

Order the following from smallest to largest: nucleotide, DNA strand, gene, protein, cell, sugar molecule.

The cell is the largest in this group, as a single cell is able to hold many, many times what the other items on the list contain. Cells can be seen even without a microscope at times, like some nerve and muscle cells.

From there, the DNA strand is the next biggest. These strands are often thousands of molecules long, and are considered macromolecules for this reason.

Next is the gene. A gene is just a single section of a DNA strand, and is therefore smaller. There are many genes on each strand of DNA.

Protein molecules are next. These massive molecules are often very specific in function, and under poor conditions can rearrange themselves in such a way that they no longer work.

Then we come to the nucleotide. The nucleotide is a large molecule, with several different varieties, but will always contain more atoms than glucose, a simple sugar.

So, from smallest to largest, the list would be arranged sugar molecule, nucleotide, protein, gene, DNA strand, and cell.

How do I write a reflection for Tuck Everlasting by Natalie Babbitt?

A reflection is a piece of writing in which you write about your personal response to a book.  A good way to begin is to look at parts of the book’s plot and themes of the book that meant something to you personally.  Since this book is about the consequences of being immortal, that might be a good place to start. 

The author’s message for the book is that there is a cycle to life, and all living beings must take part in that cycle.  To not take part in it makes for a lonely existence, where you do not fully get to realize all that life’s existence has to offer.  

Consider Pa Tuck’s explanation to Winnie about how the Tucks feel about being immortal. 

But this rowboat now, it's stuck. If we didn't move it out ourself, it would stay here forever, trying to get loose, but stuck. That's what us Tucks are, Winnie. Stuck so's we can't move on. We ain't part of the wheel no more. Dropped off, Winnie. Left behind. And everywhere around us, things is moving and growing and changing. (Ch. 12) 

A reflection may include quotes like this, from parts of the book that you found meaningful or important.  Then you can share how you feel.  Do you agree with the author’s presentation of immortality?  Do you think the book does a good job exploring the consequences of living forever? 

In your reflection, you should write about what the book’s themes mean to you, and how you relate to the characters.  For example, do you understand Winnie and the choices she makes?  Do you appreciate the Tuck family’s response to their situation?  These reactions to the book would be useful additions to your reflection.  Basically, write about what the book means to you.  You can also write about if you liked the book.

Which groups were divided during the Great Schism?

The Great Schism refers to the permanent separation of the Eastern and Western Christian Church in 1054 AD. As Christianity spread across Europe, it developed some regional differences, especially related to theology (e.g. disputes about the Trinity) and church practice (e.g. what type of bread should be used in the Lord's Supper). Additionally, there was tension among the centers of Christianity (particularly Rome in the West and Constantinople in the East) about whether one of them should have primacy over the others, and if so, which one. Rome believed it should possess universal jurisdiction since it had been founded by Peter, and Christ had said that he would build his rock upon Peter (according to the Roman Catholic interpretation); Constantinople did not. All of these tensions were heightened by the great distance between the East and West.

Eventually, these disputes--among others--bubbled over into permanent separation. Since 1054, the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church have been permanently separated and have developed mostly independent of one another. Eventually, the Protestant Church broke off from the Roman Catholic Church, leaving Christianity with three main branches.

How does Reverend Hale represent integrity in The Crucible by Arthur Miller?

Reverend Hale is the first official clergy from outside of Salem who is called in to investigate the supposed compacts with the devil. He bases his authority, not on his own thoughts, but on a number of texts by sanctioned authorities. He presents an unbiased opinion of his findings, with understanding of the possibility of misleading evidence. When the Salem judges take over the investigation, he begins to see that these judges are not unbiased but assume guilt of all those brought before the bar. Reverend Hale then switches sides, though all the while supporting what he believes is the truth, and begins to disagree with the judges’ findings. He encourages John Proctor to sign the confession simply to avoid death and giving in to the judges’ assumption of guilt. Presumably, he regrets not stopping the trials before this happened and is at a loss of how he can save anyone now. This shows his integrity, his dedication to the truth rather than hysteria. His trust is in the truth rather than the opinions of people, no matter how socially prominent.

When Charlie visits a college economics professor on May 15, what does he discover that disappoints him?

Charlie is disappointed to discover that the economics professor, along with several other professors in different fields, has only a limited, narrow, highly specialized knowledge within his own field.

That is, though this economics professor may have been an expert in interest rates, he knew nothing about military economics and therefore couldn't answer Charlie's questions.

Charlie is practically infuriated, having been very excited beforehand to bounce ideas off someone whom he had assumed would possess a broad and deep knowledge about the entire field of economics. He was wrong. And his mistake only infuriates Charlie more because it disillusions him: it leads him to the conclusion that Charlie himself was wrong, and naive, to believe that college professors were "intellectual giants."

Like a child or young teenager who is just now realizing that his parents and teachers are humans capable of making mistakes and possessing only imperfect, incomplete knowledge, Charlie is awakening to the realities of the world and to the limitations of his fellow scholars.

Charlie's new powers of emotional insight also lead to a sad discovery in this situation. He realizes that the economics professor, with his narrow scope of knowledge and inflated ego, is afraid of having the rest of the world figure out that he's only human. That's why the professor was so eager to walk away from Charlie after being unable to answer his questions. This professor, along with other men that Charlie used to admire, is now revealed to Charlie as utterly flawed. He can barely handle this disappointment.

How does Tennyson represent his faith in Christianity throughout the poem "Morte d'Arthur"?

In this section of Tennyson's poem, Arthur is speaking from the barge which bears him forward to the land of the dead. He speaks to Sir Bedivere, the brave knight of the Round Table who, in this version of the story, was instructed by Arthur to throw the sword Excalibur into the lake. Bedivere finds this order difficult to fulfill, for he does not want the magic of Excalibur to be lost. But Arthur insists. In this segment Arthur comforts Bedivere in his despair by saying that the kingdom of God and heaven are more important than earthly existence. ("More things are wrought by prayer than this world dreams of"). Arthur reminds Bedivere that everything that happens is God's will ("For so the whole round earth is every way bound by gold chains about the feet of God").

This a much more decisively Christian worldview than that presented in Thomas Malory's version of the story (also called "Le Morte d'Arthur"); Malory's version is somewhat less focused on Christianity and presents a more varied view of spirituality that lends credence to paganism and mysticism (expressed in the characters of Merlin and Morgan le Fay, for example, who both use magic and believe in the power of fate). 

Why is Frankenstein still important today?

One of the most significant reasons that Frankenstein is still important today is that it raises questions about medical and scientific ethics that we still grapple with, even now. For example, one might feel that Victor Frankenstein goes too far with his experiment. Arguably, his intentions are good; he wants to find a way to render human beings incapable of any death but a violent one. He wants to find a way to eradicate the detrimental effects of disease on humanity. It isn't clear, however, how creating a person from pieces of dead bodies would actually accomplish this, and Victor seems to violate many legal and ethical codes in his quest.  He illegally digs up dead bodies in order to use them for parts, and he tampers with live animals in an attempt to understand how life happens. On the other hand, since he does these things in the interest of science, some might say he is justified, a scientific pioneer even. Where is the line between right and wrong here? Does Victor go too far? At what point does he trespass beyond the bounds of ethical behavior? These are the kinds of questions that we still do not have hard and fast answers for, and Frankenstein remains important and relevant to our world because it, too, attempts to explore them.

What are five references to the sun and dust in John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath?

The whole of the first chapter is one of Steinbeck's intercalary chapters that describes the great dust storm of 1934. So, naturally, the word "dust" dominates the chapter.  Some of the most important quotes:

• "In the roads where the teams moved, where the wheels milled the ground and the hooves of the horses beat the ground, the dirt crust broke and the dust formed. Every moving thing lifted the dust into the air: a walking man lifted a thin layer as high as his waist, and a wagon lifted the dust as high as the fence tops, and an automobile boiled a cloud behind it. The dust was long in settling back again."

In this first quote, Steinbeck describes how the drought hit the Plains states and how the dust began to form in the farming countryside.  The imagery here shows the reader just how enveloping that dust could be with just the slightest movement.

• "A gentle wind followed the rain clouds, driving them on northward, a wind that softly clashed the drying corn. A day went by and the wind increased, steady, unbroken by gusts. The dust from the roads fluffed up and spread out and fell on the weeds beside the fields, and fell into the fields a little way. Now the wind grew strong and hard and it worked at the rain crust in the corn fields. Little by little the sky was darkened by the mixing dust, and the wind felt over the earth, loosened the dust, and carried it away. The wind grew stronger. The rain crust broke and the dust lifted up out of the fields and drove gray plumes into the air like sluggish smoke. The corn threshed the wind and made a dry, rushing sound. The finest dust did not settle back to earth now, but disappeared into the darkening sky."

Steinbeck uses personification here to show how the wind takes up the dust and spreads it across the land.  He also plays with the use of color as he does throughout the chapter, this time describing the darkening sky which will turn red with the dust mixing with the air.

• "The dawn came, but no day. In the gray sky a red sun appeared, a dim red circle that gave a little light, like dusk; and as that day advanced, the dusk slipped back toward darkness, and the wind cried and whimpered over the fallen corn."

There is more personification here with wind crying and whimpering over the corn just as the reader imagines the people will be mourning their lost crops and the loss of their livelihoods.

• "When the night came again it was black night, for the stars could not pierce the dust to get down, and the window lights could not even spread beyond their own yards. Now the dust was evenly mixed with the air, an emulsion of dust and air. Houses were shut tight, and cloth wedged around doors and windows, but the dust came in so thinly that it could not be seen in the air, and it settled like pollen on the chairs and tables, on the dishes. The people brushed it from their shoulders. Little lines of dust lay at the door sills."

This is another instance when Steinbeck's repetition of the word "dust" helps the reader feel just how pervasive the dust was in the scene that is described.  And, even though this quote does not mention the sun, it's the lack of the sun and light that is important.  

• "In the middle of that night the wind passed on and left the land quiet. The dust-filled air muffled sound more completely than fog does. The people, lying in their beds, heard the wind stop. They awakened when the rushing wind was gone. They lay quietly and listened deep into the stillness. Then the roosters crowed, and their voices were muffled, and the people stirred restlessly in their beds and wanted the morning. They knew it would take a long time for the dust to settle out of the air. In the morning the dust hung like fog, and the sun was as red as ripe new blood. All day the dust sifted down from the sky, and the next day it sifted down. An even blanket covered the earth. It settled on the corn, piled up on the tops of the fence posts, piled up on the wires; it settled on roofs, blanketed the weeds and trees. "

Here, again, Steinbeck mentions the red sun, red because of the color of the dust.  This scene is the aftermath of the great dust storm, as people begin to emerge from their houses to survey the damage.  And, as Steinbeck says about the dust, so it is true of the people's lives: "They knew it would take a long time for the dust to settle"

What is the literary function of using a child narrator to explore the conflicts between personal conscience and social norms in Harper Lee’s To...

One of Atticus' most important morals is found in his determination to be the same man at home as he is in public. Simply put, this idea means that Atticus wants to remain consistent in his values and stand up for what he believes in, despite the influence of any social norms that attempt to pressure him into changing his values. As such, Atticus staunchly believes that social conscience must be strong enough to overcome the negative pressure of social norms, such as Maycomb's ingrained racism. 

The reader encounters this moral viewpoint through the perspective of Scout, Atticus' young daughter. Since she's so inexperienced when it comes to the adult world, Scout cannot understand why Atticus insists on standing up for his values in opposition to intense social pressure. In offering an explanation, Atticus is forced to use terms simple enough for a child to comprehend. As such, by using a child narrator, Harper Lee is able to justify the simplification of important moral conflicts, such as the tension between personal conscience and social norms. All in all, Lee uses her child narrator to make complex philosophical problems more accessible to her audience.  

How does the author create humor in "Charles"?

The humor in this story is created from Laurie’s fanciful account of Charles’s behavior, and his parents’ clueless reaction to it.  It is also funny that Laurie’s mother and father are so judgmental of Charles’s mother, when Charles turns out to be Laurie.  The irony makes it funny.

Laurie’s behavior is funny in itself, or at least it would be if you were not his parents.  The fact that his parents do not see the connection between Laurie’s misbehavior and Charles adds humor too.  His parents are overwhelmed with the new baby and do not have time to pay attention to Laurie.

Laurie comes barging in, slamming the door.  He acts inappropriately from the moment he enters the story.

At lunch he spoke insolently to his father, spilled his baby sister’s milk, and remarked that his teacher said we were not to take the name of the Lord in vain.

Laurie’s mother worries that kindergarten is unsettling for Laurie because there are ruffians like Charles there.  She has no idea!  Humorously, the family incorporates Charles into their everyday lives. 

With the third week of kindergarten Charles was an institution in our family; the baby was being a Charles when she cried all afternoon; Laurie did a Charles when he filled his wagon full of mud and pulled it through the kitchen …

When Laurie’s mother misses the first meeting at school, there is a little hint at what is to come.  She finally goes to the school, and looks for someone that could be Charles’s mother, but none of the women look “haggard enough.”  She introduces herself to the teacher, who says they are all “interested in Laurie.”  I’ll bet!  Then the teacher tells her that Laurie had some trouble adjusting.  When Laurie’s mother asks about Charles, she finds out there is no Charles.  The author leaves it there, with no more commentary.  It’s self-explanatory.  That abrupt ending makes it more humorous.

What was Lennie's bad decision in Of Mice and Men?

Lennie makes several bad decisions throughout the course of the book.  The guys have had to relocate because of a bad decision he made in Weed.  Once on the ranch in their new jobs, he takes a puppy, which he promptly kills, and then breaks Curley’s wife’s neck.

George describes the incident in Weed when he and Lennie are waiting to go to the ranch.  Lennie wanted to feel the lady’s soft dress, and pet it like his mouse.  Lennie likes to touch soft things, and stroke them.

"… Well, how the hell did she know you jus' wanted to feel her dress? She jerks back and you hold on like it was a mouse. She yells and we got to hide in a irrigation ditch all day with guys lookin' for us, and we got to sneak out in the dark and get outa the country. …” (Ch. 1) 

This incident haunts George and Lennie, and foreshadows trouble to come.  It makes George realize that Lennie might get into deeper trouble someday, which is why he brings it up.  Lennie just doesn’t understand, and doesn’t even really remember. 

The second serious mistake Lennie made was to touch Curley’s wife’s hair.  She wanted to talk to him because he was lonely.  You could say that Lennie made a mistake in crushing Curley’s hand, but he can’t really be blamed for that because George told him to.  However, Curley’s wife didn’t really realize how dangerous Lennie was. 

When Curley’s wife sees the dead puppy, Lennie explains how it died. 

"He was so little," said Lennie. "I was jus' playin' with him... an' he made like he's gonna bite me... an' I made like I was gonna smack him... an'... an' I done it. An' then he was dead." (Ch. 5) 

This doesn’t seem to make her cautious though.  She has no interest in a dead dog, and tells him not to worry about it because the “whole country is fulla mutts.”  She doesn’t realize that he will accidentally break her neck trying to stroke her hair.

Why does Mitty daydream so much?

Walter Mitty daydreams in order to combat the monotony of his life and to become the type of person that he wishes that he could be.  His daydreams are a form of escapism.  

Walter Mitty isn't exactly a flawless, heroic figure.  He's quite forgetful, he's a bad driver, he gets bossed around by his wife a lot, and he's not good at mechanical things.  In order to see himself and the events of his life as more exciting, Walter Mitty daydreams that he is a heroic alpha male that is in control of incredibly tense situations.  He imagines himself as an ace pilot, a world renowned surgeon, and a phenomenal lawyer.  In each case, Mitty is the heroic figure.  He is the center of attention.  Everybody depends on him, and his success is beneficial to everybody around him.  That's not how Mitty's real life is.  His fantasies are his way of escaping his real life realities.   

Why was the Black Death a good thing for some people?

Between 1347 and 1352, the Black Death wreaked unprecedented havoc on the population of Medieval Europe. This outbreak of bubonic plague, however, was not bad news for everyone: agricultural labourers, for instance, gained much from this catastrophe. According to Utah State University, the population decrease, which historians estimate at between one-third and one-half, meant that the "nobility had difficulty securing the necessary workforce to sow their fields and harvest their crops." (See the reference link provided). This meant that agricultural labourers could be more selective about their working conditions: they had the opportunity to take over land which was previously occupied by plague victims, for instance, and demanded better wages because they were fewer in number. 

We see the impact of this change through a Sumptuary Law which the English Parliament introduced in 1363. This law came as a response to the increased wealth of labourers and sought to curtail their newly-found freedoms by dictating how they dressed and what foods they ate.  

Compare Gross Domestic Product and Gross National Product.

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Gross National Product (GNP) are both ways to measure the size and strength of an economy. They do so by measuring the market value of all goods and services that are produced for final sale in an economy. They are calculated in different ways and often have different applications.

Gross Domestic Product

Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is an economic calculation of the monetary value of all finished goods and services that are produced within the physical boundaries of a country. The GDP may be calculated on an annual or quarterly basis.

Gross National Product

Gross National Product (GNP) is an economic calculation of the monetary value of all finished goods and services that are produced by a country's residents. The GNP may be calculated on an annual or quarterly basis.

GDP vs. GNP

The main difference between Gross Domestic Product and Gross National Product has to do with the physical location of the economic activity. The GDP is calculated based on economic activity within a country's borders; the GNP is calculated based on the economic activity of a country's residents that could be located anywhere in the world.

What was the effect of President George Washington's actions as President?

George Washington served as President of the United States at a very important time in our history. As a new country with a new plan of government, we needed to have a good leader. George Washington was a good leader for our country.

One issue President Washington faced was dealing with our debt. With the help of his Secretary of Treasury, Alexander Hamilton, a debt plan was developed that would allow the country to begin paying its debts. Alexander Hamilton also created a plan to have a national banking system.

Another issue we faced was dealing with unfriendly Native American tribes. There were attacks by some of the Native Americans against us. Our military attacked some of these tribes to make our country safer. Anthony Wayne won a battle at Fallen Timbers. This battle showed that our government, led by President Washington, was willing to deal with these attacks.

President Washington also stood up to other countries. When Spain and Great Britain tried to push us around, President Washington worked to sign agreements with these countries to deal with the issues we were facing. President Washington knew we weren't prepared to go to war. Pinckney’s Treaty with Spain and Jay’s Treaty with Great Britain resolved some of the issues we had with these countries without going to war. One of these issues dealt with trade.

President Washington also worked to keep order at home. When the Whiskey Rebellion occurred, President Washington had the military move in to restore order. This showed our people that the government wouldn’t tolerate uprisings in our country. Our government would act when these issues arose.

President Washington did many things to help our country move forward.

What was Young's Double Slit Experiment, and why is it important?

Thomas Young's Double Slit Experiment could well be the most important experiment in the history of science. At the time its significance was not really appreciated, but about a century later, adaptations of the Double Slit Experiment laid the foundation for quantum mechanics, which now underlies basically all of physics as we know it (except astrophysics, because we've not yet been able to make sense of gravity in terms of quantum mechanics).

The experiment is actually quite simple: You have a light source in a dark room, and you put an opaque screen in front of it, and then some film or another light-recording apparatus behind that. You cut two very thin slits in the opaque screen that are very close together, and then you observe what sort of pattern emerges on the film. Then you try covering one of the slits and compare the new pattern.

The question Young sought to answer was whether light is a wave or a particle (the correct answer is both... sort of. Or maybe neither?).

If light is a particle, then the light coming out of the two slits should be additive; the pattern with two slits should be basically the same as the pattern with one slit, only twice as bright (and partly shifted, based on the distance between the two slits).

But if light is a wave, then the light coming out of the two slits should exhibit interference; the waves should overlap in such a way that they add in some places and subtract in others. The resulting pattern should have dark parts and light parts, dark where the waves canceled out and bright where they added together; these should alternate in proportion to the wavelength.

What Young observed was the latter: There were dark parts and light parts, just as you'd expect if light is a wave. Young and his contemporaries left it there: Light is a wave!

But later expansions of his experiment showed that this wasn't quite right. Once we made more precise equipment so that you could measure whether a particular photon went through one slit or the other, we found that the pattern looked like particles! Trying to understand why we sometimes got a wave-like pattern and other times we got a particle-like pattern is what led to quantum mechanics.

What is the theme of "There Will Come Soft Rains" by Ray Bradbury?

The theme of Ray Bradbury's short story "There Will Come Soft Rains" is an ironic commentary on the state of mankind in a post-atomic world. On one hand, humans have advanced to the point that they can create a house which has eliminated all of the drudgery of domestic life, including cooking, cleaning, and setting up furniture. Technology has advanced to a level where the house itself can provide entertainment, such as automatically programmed audio of the family's favorite poem and intricate video which emanates from the walls of the children's nursery. Had it not been for the bad luck of a tree limb crashing through a kitchen window, it might be presumed that the house could continue on with its daily routine far into a future devoid of humans. The house is truly a marvel of human ingenuity.

On the other hand, a culture which has advanced to the seeming pinnacle of technological invention is unable to control its lust for war. Despite major advancements in creativity and the machinery to make it a reality, humans are seemingly no different than they have been for centuries, always moving on to the next conflict that results in death and destruction. Unfortunately, a world which is willing to use nuclear weapons may be a world which, in the words of Sara Teasdale, will not mind "If mankind perished utterly."

How does the style and content of Malcolm X's description of learning to dance connect to the text's power?

Malcolm's description of learning to dance shows a lack of autonomy. It enhances the text's power in how it underscores the danger of mistaking illusion for reality.  

Malcolm describes his appropriation of dancing skill in a unique way. Malcolm learned to dance almost by accident. It took place without his control:

I can't remember when it was that I actually learned how-that is to say, I can't recall the specific night or nights. But dancing was the chief action at those "pad parties," so I've no doubt about how and why my initiation into lindy-hopping came about. With alcohol or marijuana lightening my head, and that wild music wailing away on those portable record players, it didn't take long to loosen up the dancing instincts in my African heritage. All I remember is that. . . some girl grabbed me—they often would take the initiative and grab a partner, for no girl at those parties ever would dream that anyone present couldn't dance—and there I was out on the floor.

Malcolm learns to dance because he attended "pad parties." No one actively taught him. Even if someone did instruct him, he would not have remembered because of his drug use. He also indicates that he learned to dance because his "African heritage" was released. Once he "loosened up," Malcolm "was out on the floor." He does not display much in way of agency. Rather, Malcolm describes his dances as "impulses" that "were stirred by music." 

This description enhances the power of the text's meaning. In this portion of his narrative, Malcolm emphasizes how he was unaware of the conditions that surrounded him. He had no idea he was being manipulated into living a morally bankrupt existence. He had little understanding about the realities of being a person of color in a nation that displayed prejudicial attitudes. He was not conscious of his own spiritual deterioration. These are lessons the text emphasizes.  

In describing how he learned to dance, Malcolm communicates what it is like to live a life without purpose. His description shows the randomness of life when a person mistakes temporary illusion for permanent reality. Malcolm lived his life believing that "pad parties," drugs, and excessive socializing were valid ways of life. This description enhances the text's power because it communicates how people who live like Malcolm lack control over their existence. It highlights the challenges facing people of color in America at the time.  Such a description serves as a clear call for people to recognize what is wrong and change it as soon as possible.

In what ways are Monstresor and Fortunato alike and different in "The Cask of Amontillado" by Edgar Allan Poe?

Montresor and Fortunato are both upper-class, but Fortunato belongs to a more privileged group than Montresor.

We do not have much background on Montresor and Fortunato, but we can tell that they are not close friends.  They seem to be only acquaintances. There is evidence that Fortunato is part of a privileged group known as the Masons, but Montresor is not.

“You do not comprehend?” he said.

“Not I,” I replied.

“Then you are not of the brotherhood.”

“How?”

“You are not of the masons.”

“Yes, yes,” I said; “yes, yes.”

“You? Impossible! A mason?”

Fortunato laughs off the thought of Montresor being a Mason. This seems to show Montresor is not in Fortunato’s league. We do not know what the supposed injury was that Fortunato did to Montresor, but he may be envious of Fortunato’s status. Fortunato readily considers himself a wine expert, and Montresor appeals to him on the grounds of asking for his help. He also demonstrates concern for Fortunato’s health. It seems to indicate Fortunato is his superior.

Both men are definitely from important families to a certain extent; Montresor has a crypt, Fortunato is one of the Masons. Montresor seems to suffer from some kind of psychosis. He believes he is justified in killing Fortunato over the slightest perceived insult.

Fortunato is definitely gullible, while Montresor is cunning. Montresor is able to concoct an elaborate scheme that gets Fortunato underground and allows him to kill him with impunity. Fortunato never sees it coming. Montresor must have seemed like a perfectly normal man.

It also seems that Fortunato knows how to have a good time, but Montresor does not.

He accosted me with excessive warmth, for he had been drinking much. The man wore motley. He had on a tight-fitting parti-striped dress, and his head was surmounted by the conical cap and bells. 

Montresor celebrates the holiday by killing a man. He is not out partying like Fortunato. Different strokes, I guess.

Write a general formula to describe the variation: the square of T varies directly with the cube of a and inversely with the square of​ d; ...

Hello!

Because `T^2` is directly proportional to `a^3,` then `a^3` must be at the numerator. `T^2` is inversely proportional to `d^2` means `d^2` is at the denominator. Also it may be multiplied by any constant `C.`

So the general formula for `T^2` is `T^2 = C*a^3/d^2.`  It is given that for `a=3` and `d=2` must be `T=5.` We can find `C` from this:

`5^2 = C*3^3/2^2,` so `C = (25*4)/27 = 100/27`  and  `T^2 = 100/27 * a^3/d^2.`

And if we want a formula for `T,` not `T^2,` it is

`T = +- sqrt(C)*a^(3/2)/d = +- 10/(3sqrt(3)) *a^(3/2)/d =+- (10 sqrt(3))/(9) *a^(3/2)/d.`

`y' = sqrt(x)y` Solve the differential equation

An ordinary differential equation (ODE) has differential equation for a function with single variable. A first order ODE follows `(dy)/(dx)= f(x,y)` .

It can also be in a form of `N(y) dy= M(x) dx` as variable separable differential equation..

 To be able to set-up the problem as `N(y) dy= M(x) dx` , we let` y' = (dy)/(dx).`

 The problem: `y'=sqrt(x)y` becomes:

`(dy)/(dx)=sqrt(x)y`

Rearrange by cross-multiplication, we get:

`(dy)/y=sqrt(x)dx`

Apply direct integration on both sides:` int (dy)/y=int sqrt(x)dx`  to solve for the general solution of a differential equation.

For the left side, we applying basic integration formula for logarithm:

`int(dy)/y= ln|y|`

For the right side, we apply the Law of Exponent: `sqrt(x)=x^(1/2)` then follow the Power Rule of integration: `int x^n dx = x^(n+1)/(n+1)+C`

`int sqrt(x)* dx= int x^(1/2)* dx`

                   `= x^(1/2+1)/(1/2+1)+C`

                  ` = x^(3/2)/(3/2)+C`

                 ` = x^(3/2)*(2/3)+C`

                 ` = (2x^(3/2))/3+C`

Combining the results from both sides, we get the general solution of the differential equation as:

`ln|y|=(2x^(3/2))/3+C`

or

`y =e^(((2x^(3/2))/3+C))`

What are the arguments that were put forward against the change of the social services 1946 referendum in Australia?

The 1946 Constitutional referendum in Australia defined the ability of the legislative branch to pass laws related to social services, including unemployment insurance, allowances for pregnant women and widows, medical services, pharmaceutical aid, and benefits for students. Many of these social services already existed in Australia prior to the referendum, but its passage clarified the extent to which the government could provide aid, and made the existence of the laws constitutional. One concern about the expansion of social services powers was the increase of revenue granted to the Commonwealth relative to the states; in 1942, the Commonwealth became the sole government entity responsible for collecting income tax, taking some responsibility away from the states. Some Australians were concerned about the increasing centralization of taxation, especially when the Commonwealth increased taxes to allow benefits for the sick and unemployed. Another argument against the referendum was that the increase in autonomy granted to the Commonwealth would subvert its constitutional role. Those against the referendum argued that it would grant the Commonwealth too much legislative power, in addition to providing it with an increase in tax revenue. Overall, the opponents of the 1946 referendum were primarily concerned about how it would provide both more tax income and more legislative power than the Constitution had allowed at the time, and promoted conforming to the Constitution's existing allowances rather than changing it to protect these new powers. However, the referendum passed with 54% of the vote, and the Constitution was amended.

A stone is thrown vertically upward with a velocity of 5 m/s. Acceleration due to gravity is 10 ms^- 2 in the downward direction. How can I...

We can use equations of motion to solve this problem.

In the given scenario, the initial velocity (u) of the stone is given as 5 m/s. The acceleration due to gravity (g) is 10 m/s^2 in the downward direction. This means that it will oppose the upward motion of the stone. This will cause the stone to slow down and ultimately come to a rest. When this happens, the velocity will be zero. After that the stone will start falling back. 

Thus, for the upward motion, final velocity (v) = 0 m/s.

Using v^2 = u^2 + 2as = u^2 + 2(-g)s

then 0^2 = 5^2 + 2(-10)s

Solving this, we get: s = -25/(-20) = 1.25 m.

The time taken to reach the highest point can be solved by:

v = u + at

or, 0 = 5 + (-10) t

or, t = -5/-10 = 0.5 s.

Thus, the stone will attain a maximum height of 1.25 m, 0.5 seconds after being thrown in the upwards direction with a velocity of 5 m/s.

Hope this helps. 

In Chapter 8 of Across Five Aprils by Irene Hunt, what does Dave Burdow send to Jethro?

The gift is a large quantity of logs.

If you head to Chapter 8 and read about ten paragraphs in, you'll see where Jethro is pleasantly surprised, and somewhat embarrassed, to be the recipient of a gift from Dave Burdow. It's a load of logs: a valuable resource in any situation, but especially now that the war has placed a strain on the availability and conveyance of goods. The logs will be particularly helpful to Jethro and his family, who are in the process of building a new barn. (And if they don't get it finished before the first snowfall, then their animals may suffer without the shelter they need.)

Jethro's reaction to the news of this generous gift helps us understand his character and how it's developing. His face turns red and he struggles to use good grammar as he offers thanks for the gift, and the abundance it represents even makes Jethro capable of forgetting, for a short while, that a war is going on. This intense, abashed yet humble reaction shows us how conscientious Jethro is becoming, and his attempt to use good English shows us how he's trying to rise above his humble background. Also, the fact that Jethro is receiving this gift from someone he barely knows shows us how his kindness has influenced others.

What are some examples of figurative language in Chapter 9 of The Magician's Nephew?

First, in this chapter, we'll find plenty of visual imagery. Any time the narrator uses specific words that show us exactly what the objects and characters in the story look like, that's imagery. Here's an example:

The higher slopes grew dark with heather. Patches of rougher and more bristling green appeared in the valley. Digory did not know what they were until one began coming up quite close to him. It was a little, spiky thing that threw out dozens of arms and covered these arms with green and grew larger at the rate of about an inch every two seconds.

Above, notice that the narrator didn't vaguely state something like "There were trees around Digory." Instead, he showed the precise color and shape of the trees so that we could envision them in our minds.

Second, Uncle Andrew's outburst is full of hyperbole, or exaggeration for effect. He uses extreme language to express his anger and frustration; as a result, we can sympathize with him and understand that he might be going a bit crazy. The hyperbole also simply makes this part funny. Here are just a few examples from his speech:

"I have been most shamefully, most abominably treated... You have insisted on my entertaining you to an exceedingly expensive, not to say ostentatious, lunch... During that indigestible meal—I'm feeling the worse for it at this very moment—your behaviour and conversation attracted the unfavourable attention of everyone present. I feel I have been publicly disgraced."

Let's consider one more type of figurative language: the simile. We'll find a few of these:

[The valley] spread out from the Lion like a pool. It ran up the sides of the little hills like a wave.

Can you imagine a stretch of grassy land bubbling like water in a pot? For that is really the best description of what was happening. In all directions it was swelling into humps.

As you can see, a simile is a type of comparison, using the word "like" or "as," that helps you imagine what one thing is like by comparing it to something else. Above, for example, when the narrator compares the movement of the land to the bubbling of water in a pot, we understand very clearly what the bizarre movement of the land looks like in the story.

In Ray Bradbury's "All Summer In A Day," how is the sun described?

In Ray Bradbury's "All Summer in a Day," the people who live on Venus only see the sun for an hour once every seven years. The story revolves around a class of nine-year-olds who were born on Venus and cannot remember what the sun looks or feels like. Margot, however, who was born on Earth, remembers the sun vividly. Margot's perspective provides many figures of speech and descriptions about the sun. For example, Margot recalls the following about the sun:

"About how like a lemon it was, and how hot. . . 'I think the sun is a flower. . . It’s like a penny,' she said once, eyes closed. . . 'It’s like a fire,' she said, 'in the stove.'”

In the above passage, there are three similes and one metaphor that Bradbury uses to describe the sun through Margot's eyes. First, the similes compare the sun to a lemon, a penny and a fire in a stove. Then, a metaphor compares the sun to a flower. These comparisons are based on Margot's perspective and on things that she would know about or relate to in her child-like mind. Lemons, pennies, flowers, and fires are all possibly connected to her life's experiences; therefore, it is from these experiences that she is likely to retrieve information to describe the sun. None of the other classmates understand her, though, because they do not share similar experiences with the sun. She could only think to herself the following:

"She knew they thought they remembered a warmness, like a blushing in the face, in the body, in the arms and legs and trembling hands."

When the sun does finally come out, and the children are released to go outside to experience it, the sun is described using personification as follows:

". . . when the sun came out for an hour and showed its face to the stunned world. . . It was the color of flaming bronze and it was very large. And the sky around it was a blazing blue tile color."

It is interesting that other visual images through colors are observed when the sun comes out: "flaming bronze" and "blazing blue." The children's reactions also bring out colorful descriptions of the sky as follows:

 ". . . they put their hands up to that yellowness and that amazing blueness and they breathed of the fresh, fresh air. . ."

Therefore, Bradbury uses similes, metaphors, personification, and visual images of color to describe the sun and its effects on characters in the story.

How does POV affect Animal Farm's plot?

The story is told by an anonymous, omniscient third-person narrator who does not have any bias or opinions throughout the novella. The story is also told from the point of view of the animals living on Animal Farm and their inner thoughts are shared with the reader. Napoleon is the only character whose inner thoughts are not directly stated which gives his character a secretive, selfish appearance. The point of view allows the audience to experience and judge various character's feelings and motivations throughout the story. The audience is aware of Napoleon and the other pigs' motivation to oppress the lower class animals, while most of the animals are too ignorant or scared to oppose Napoleon's leadership. Orwell's decision to tell the story using a third-person narrator creates an objective view of the events happening on the farm from various perspectives. The reader can predict Napoleon's totalitarian rise to power while the animals continue to obey his increasingly unequal government policies.

`sinh(2x) = 2sinhxcoshx` Verify the identity.

`sinh(2x)=2sinh(x)cosh(x)`

Take note that hyperbolic sine and hyperbolic cosine are defined as

• 
  `sinh(u)=(e^u - e^(-u))/2`

• 
  `cosh(u)=(e^u+e^(-u))/2`

So when the left side is expressed in exponential form, it becomes

`(e^(2x)-e^(-2x))/2=2sinh(x)cosh(x)`

Factoring the numerator, it turns into

`((e^x - e^(-x))(e^x + e^(-x)))/2=2sinh(x)cosh(x)`

To return it to hyperbolic function, multiply the left side by 2/2.

`((e^x - e^(-x))(e^x + e^(-x)))/2*2/2=2sinh(x)cosh(x)`

Then, rearrange the factors in such a way that it can be expressed in terms of sinh and cosh.

`2*(e^x - e^(-x))/2 * (e^x + e^(-x))/2=2sinh(x)cosh(x)`

`2*sinh(x)*cosh(x)=2sinh(x)cosh(x)`

`2sinh(x)cosh(x)=2sinh(x)cosh(x)`

This proves that the given equation is an identity.

Therefore,  `sinh(2x)=2sinh(x)cosh(x)` is an identity.

What were Mary Wollstonecraft's views on education?

Early in her adulthood, Mary Wollstonecraft established a short-lived school for girls, however, it was her passionate beliefs about the rights and equality of women that formed her ideas on education. After her school failed, she wrote “Thoughts on the Education of Daughters” in order to establish herself as a writer. Later, in 1792, she wrote A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, which expressed her views on educated woman in society.

As her life progressed, she became more vocal with her feminist belief that girls should be educated so they would value themselves thus they would become better wives and mothers. She felt that children reared by educated, interested parents would mature into more productive, respectful individuals. This was opposite of the beliefs of her contemporaries who believed that women should be dull, submissive, irrational creatures without the full benefit of formal education. Mary Wollstonecraft believed in the rationality of women, and that education was key for them to understand their worth in life.

Mary believed in co-education that included physical activity. Lessons should be presented using discourse instead of lecture and rote memorization. She felt that girls educated with peers of both genders would be better thinkers and conversationalists. They would have self-respect and make better partners to their husbands, which would improve the condition of the family, and of society as a whole.

In The Outsiders by S. E. Hinton, who do the two boys go to for help? Why is it significant that they go to this person and not Darry? ...

Johnny and Pony went to Dally for help because Pony was fighting with Darry and because Dally had more experience being on the wrong side of the law.

Johnny and Ponyboy find themselves needing help because of a combination of unfortunate events.  They meet some nice girls at the movies that just happen to be Socs.  The Socs’ boyfriends do not appreciate their girls hanging out with greasers.  The two gangs are constantly at odds.  The girls leave with their boyfriends, but when they find Johnny and Pony in the park later, there is trouble.

Johnny and Pony were in the park because Pony came home late and got in a fight with his older brother Darry.  Darry hit him, and Pony ran.  He felt that Darry was too hard on him and did not really care about him.  Johnny was from an abusive home and basically didn’t mind staying away.

In the park, the Socs jump Pony and Johnny.  They are Bob and Randy, Cherry and Marcia’s boyfriends.  Bob nearly drowns Pony, and Johnny intervenes.  He kills Bob, and the boys run.  They feel that Dally is the best person to turn to, because Dally has been in trouble with the law enough to know what to do.

"We'll need money. And maybe a gun. And a plan."

Money. Maybe a gun? A plan. Where in the world would we get these things?

"Dally," Johnny said with finality. "Dally'll get us outs here."

I heaved a sigh. Why hadn't I thought of that? But I never thought of anything.

Dallas Winston could do anything. (Ch. 4)

Dally does help the boys.  He has them hide out in an abandoned church and later comes for them.  This is how all three of them end up getting injured in the church fire, when they try to save a group of kids on a trip.  Johnny is injured enough that he will eventually die, so the boys do not really need to worry about being on the run anymore.

This experience shows Pony that Darry really does care about him.  It is difficult for Darry, because he is the older brother and has to be the father figure.  Pony's trouble really worries him, and of course he is horrified that his little brother is injured, and that he played a part in it by driving him off.  Their relationship is stronger from this point on.

Critically discuss the relevance of philosophy and the philosophy of education in a teacher education programme.

There are as many different approaches to teaching students as there are students themselves. As a result, it is important that someone learning to be a teacher also learns about the different philosophies and comes to identify their own. Of course, a teacher's philosophy will (and should) change throughout their career as they come to learn new information and have new experiences, but they should leave their program with an understanding of 1) what they want to do as a teacher, and 2) how they want to do it.

Developing a teaching philosophy also helps to identify priorities. No teacher can focus on all aspects of development or even all aspects of a particular subject at once. If you're teaching young children, do you want to work more on social-emotional development or pre-reading skills? If you're teaching middle-school math, do you want to focus on whatever will be most real-world relevant or do you want to focus on more abstract concepts? If you're teaching high school students, do you find it more important that they learn facts or that they ask questions?

A good teacher education program won't tell you the answers to these questions. A good teacher program will ask them of you, and leave it to you to develop your own ideas that you can then take with you when you prepare your own classroom.

What does "glittered when he walks" suggest in Edwin Arlington Robinson's poem "Richard Cory"?

The line "...he glittered when he walked" suggests the perspective that the common people think of Richard Cory as an almost celestial being—certainly, one much above them in social position.

Just as people nowadays speak of great athletes, famous actors and actresses, and others who are above the norm as "stars," the people who suffer during the Panic of 1893, a serious economic depression, perceive Richard Cory as a being who is untouched by the vicissitudes of their lives.

Of course, the irony in this poem is that although Richard Cory is wealthy and does not have to go "without the meat," the "people on the pavement" (the ordinary people) feel intimidated by his high station and, therefore no one engages with him or even considers why he comes to town and speaks to people. In reality, Richard Cory, "who is always human when he talked," would probably like to have some interaction with people. So, in his terrible loneliness, Richard Cory despairs and puts a bullet into his head.

Why does the narrator keep a tire iron under his seat in "Greasy Lake"?

T. C. Boyle's short story "Greasy Lake" follows the story of a group of rebellious teenagers who spend a summer evening at the titular Greasy Lake, where they can drink, smoke, and unleash their "bad boy" tendencies. When the boys arrive at their destination, they see a car parked there with a couple—who they assume to be their friend, Tony Lovett, and his girl—making out inside.

Thinking they can prank Tony, they try to sneak up on him, but discover the man within the car is not him after all. The angry man tries to attack the boys, but the narrator pulls a tire iron from his car and hits the man with it. When considering why the tire iron is stashed under the seat, the narrator simply states,

I kept [the tire iron] there because bad characters always keep tire irons under the driver's seat.

In other words, he kept it there believing it would make him seem "bad."

How would you address your colleagues at a youth club meeting you will be chairing differently than you would speak to your friends during a tea...

The core differences in your speech are determined by who your audience is and the genre of the venue. Let's start with audience. The question states that the youth group gathering is colleagues. Because the youth meeting is among colleagues, it sounds more business-related. Your word choice and non-verbal communication should reflect that. You are likely to use jargon, but not slang. Jargon is technical language that your audience will understand. Your body language will also show a more formal attitude. Likely, your body language will be much more subdued than if you were talking to friends. Next is the venue difference. You are chairing a formal business meeting, which means the majority of your remarks will have been planned before the meeting. Your job is to guide things along and keep the meeting on track. Your colleagues will talk, and you have a responsibility to hear them out without interruption. All in all, the way you address your colleagues will be much more formal than when speaking with friends.

The meeting among friends will be very different. You will likely not be able to use jargon, because the terms might draw blank stares. You will, however, be able to use slang, incomplete sentences, and animated body language. The conversation might even be subject to interruptions and teasing. Those two things likely would not happen at the other meeting. Your friends also won't expect anyone to have come to the gathering with prepared remarks.

I need to explain the importance and role of the witches and the prophecies to the outcome of the play. Did they control Macbeth and drive his...

The Weird Sisters purposely try to manipulate Macbeth, engaging his trust, and then deceiving him into believing that his ascension to the throne is all but guaranteed by fate, igniting his ambition to be king.

Duncan names Macbeth the Thane of Cawdor at the end of Act 1, Scene 3; therefore, when the Weird Sisters "predict" that he will become Thane of Cawdor, it has actually already happened -- Macbeth just doesn't know it yet.  Therefore, they appear to be telling his future when they are really just telling him some information he doesn't have yet.  Then, when Angus and Ross tell him of his new title, it appears to confirm their accuracy and honesty.  However, the fact that they seem to be good and honest to Macbeth is actually a clue that they are truly the opposite because, in the first scene, they admitted that they were going to make good things seem bad and bad things seem good when they say, "Fair is foul, and foul is fair" (1.1.12).  However, because the first of the witches' "prophecies" seems to have come true, Macbeth thinks, "If chance will have me king, why, chance may / crown me / Without my stir" (1.3.157-159).  He didn't have to do anything to make the first of the predictions come true, so he hopes that it will be the same with the second.

Later, the witches purposely deceive Macbeth, appearing to give him assurances that he will be safe from death, but these assurances turn out simply to be enigmatically-worded statements of fact.  The apparitions that the sisters conjure tell Macbeth that "none of woman born / Shall harm Macbeth" and that "Macbeth shall never vanquished be until / Great Birnam Wood to high Dunsinane Hill / Shall come against him" (4.1.91-92, 105-107).  It sounds as though they are saying that Macbeth is basically invulnerable since everyone is born of a woman and because the trees cannot get up and move.  However, there are some loopholes in these statements that Macbeth fails to consider (which is what the witches seemed to have hoped for).  He feels supremely confident at this point, and, as Hecate said, "you all know, security / Is mortals' chiefest enemy" (3.5.32-33).  Macbeth's confidence makes him a little careless, and he fails to consider the other ways in which the sisters' statements could come to fruition.  

In "Rules of the Game" by Amy Tan, when does Meimei first become interested in chess? Through what means does she learn to play the game?

Meimei first becomes interested in chess when her brothers receive a chess set (the board and the pieces) at a Christmas party. It's second-hand, and it's missing some pieces, but the brothers seem interested in learning the game--so, naturally, Meimei (Waverly) is interested, too. Her brothers are reluctant to let her play, but she offers some of her LifeSavers candies as substitutes for the missing pieces of the game. Meimei's mother encourages her children in this pursuit, seeing the rules of chess as a representation of the rules of American society.

The booklet that came with the set and explains the rules of the game first exposes Meimei to chess and teaches her the basics of how to play. But later, as she becomes better than her brothers and shows a more lasting interest in the game, she also learns skills and strategies for the game by playing against her much older, much more skilled neighbors outdoors in the park. Later still, when Meimei's skills surpass even those of the neighbors, she becomes a master player by learning from her competitors in championships and by studying alone at home with additional books. Meimei's mother takes exceptional pride in her daughter's mastery of chess.

Why do Prince Prospero and his followers retreat to his palace?

We can find an answer to this question in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the story.

Prince Prospero and his followers retreat to the palace in order to hide from the "red death," the highly contagious and lethal illness that's run rampant through the rest of the country.

The prince only brings his healthy, happy friends with him, a great many of them, and they lock themselves into his "castellated abbey" to keep themselves safe from the infected citizens outside, and to amuse themselves with entertainment, food, and wine.

Although they act as if they aren't afraid, they know that outside the walls of this building is a terrible disease that causes copious bleeding, one that will kill you within thirty minutes once it's infected you.

If you're wondering why Prince Prospero is hiding and partying instead of using his vast wealth to help the suffering citizens of his country,  you'll be satisfied to read the rest of the story and see what happens to them inside that supposedly "safe" palace!

How does Gatsby act when the visiting trio comes to visit?

When the trio of Tom Buchanan, Mr. Sloane, and Mrs. Sloane drop by Gatsby's house, Gatsby's behavior is a little manic.  At first, he is anxious to offer them something to drink, and he is "uneasy," knowing somehow that they've only come for such a reason.  When Gatsby turns to Tom, he speaks a little "aggressively," asserting that he knows Tom's wife.  Gatsby is welcoming to Mr. and Mrs. Sloane, claiming that he'd love to have them all at his next party, and he eventually gets "control of himself" and urges them to stay for dinner.  When the woman invites him and Nick to supper, Tom can tell that Gatsby does not understand that Mr. Sloane doesn't really want them to come.  Nick sees it, Tom sees it, but Gatsby does not.  He sort of betrays himself as someone who cannot read the social cues of the old money.  Thus, his behavior is varied: at one moment anxious, the next aggressive, and later, self-assured when he shouldn't be. 

What suspicions does the narrator have about the signalman and why?

Early in "The Signal-Man," the narrator suspects that the signalman might be suffering from mental illness, as he comments in the text:

"I have speculated since, whether there may have been infection in his mind."

In addition, he also wonders if the signalman might, in fact, be a ghost:

"The monstrous thought came into my mind, as I perused the fixed eyes and the saturnine face, that this was a spirit, not a man."

The narrator suspects these things because of the signalman's unusual demeanour. When he first arrives at the signal box, for example, he notices something "remarkable" in the signalman's manner which has no obvious explanation. Moreover, when the pair come face-to-face, the narrator is struck by the signalman's attitude of "expectation" and "watchfulness." Once again, the narrator is unable to account for such an attitude. Finally, when the signalman directs a "most curious look" towards the red light before looking at the narrator, the narrator's suspicions reach their peak: ghost or patient, the narrator cannot decipher his new friend. 

How are unicellular and multicellular organisms the same? How are they different?

The obvious differences in size and complexity between unicellular organisms such as bacteria and multicellular organisms such as animals obscure some more fundamental similarities. While a bacterium is a single cell that reproduces on its own and a large animal may consist of trillions of cells working together to reproduce, they are nonetheless both made of cells, and much of the functioning of those cells is shared between them. They all process nutrients, most of them breathe oxygen (anaerobic bacteria don't), and they all strive to survive and reproduce their DNA.

Multicellular organisms are all eukaryotes, while unicellular organisms can be either eukaryotes or prokaryotes. Eukaryote cells are much more complex, containing a nucleus and a variety of organelles such as mitochondria and lysosomes, while prokaryotes are much simpler and contain very little inner structure. In fact in many ways mitochondria themselves are basically prokaryotic organisms; they have their own DNA which is passed on differently. There is evidence that mitochondria actually emerged by ancient eukaryotic cells absorbing prokaryotic organisms into themselves.

Eukaryotic unicellular organisms are in some ways more similar to multicellular organisms than they are to prokaryotes; all the same basic cellular structures are already in place in a unicellular eukaryote such as the amoeba. To get from a prokaryote like E. coli to an amoeba you have to evolve a nucleus and a Golgi apparatus and transport proteins and so on; but put a whole bunch of amoeba together, and you sort of have a multicellular organism.

Indeed, that's basically what slime molds are; they straddle the line between unicellular and multicellular, consisting of many cells that join and split at different phases of their life cycle. But all these cells are basically the same.

The ancestor of all multicellular organisms was probably something like a slime mold; then at some point, hundreds of millions of years ago, it evolved the capacity to specialize its cells, making some perform different functions from others, despite having the same underlying DNA. (Think about all the different types of cells you have: brain cells, eye cells, skin cells, stomach cells, and so on; all of those cells share the same DNA, yet function quite differently.) That evolutionary innovation is possibly what made multicellular organisms as we know them possible.

How is African culture influenced in Chinua Achebe's novel 'Things Fall Apart'?

The second part of the novel focuses mainly on this aspect. It becomes clear that the arrival of the missionaries, obviously of European descent, and the establishment of foreign forms of government creates conflict not only between the colonialists and the tribes but also within the different villages, their inhabitants, their families and amongst individuals. It also gradually eroded the natives' convictions. It is this conflict and erosion which directly impact traditional culture and lead to its breakdown.

The arrival of a few white people created confusion amongst the natives, but the matter was quickly dealt with after consultation with the oracles, as Obierika tells Okonkwo in Chapter 15, when he went to visit him in exile:

"...The first people who saw him ran away, but he stood beckoning to them. In the end the fearless ones went near and even touched him. The elders consulted their Oracle and it told them that the strange man would break their clan and spread destruction among them..."

"...I forgot to tell you another thing which the Oracle said. It said that other white men were on their way. They were locusts, it said, and that first man was their harbinger sent to explore the terrain. And so they killed him."

The murder resulted in severe retribution by the white men, as Obierika explained further:

"...The three white men and a very large number of other men surrounded the market. They must have used a powerful medicine to make themselves invisible until the market was full. And they began to shoot. Everybody was killed, except the old and the sick who were at home and a handful of men and women whose chi were wide awake and brought them out of that market."

When Obierika returned for another visit, two years later, he told Okonkwo that the situation in his home village, Umuofia had changed drastically. The missionaries had built a church there and had already converted some of the inhabitants and were sending evangelists around to the other villages.

The missionaries also arrived in Mbanta and criticized the villagers' belief in dead gods of wood and stone who unfairly punished those who did not obey the rules and destroyed children. They were told of the holy trinity and the evangelists then burst into song, which enthralled many of the onlookers, especially Nwoye, Okonkwo's son.

Many of the villagers left and some of them mocked the new religion. However, an impact had been made and would later have serious repercussions on traditional life, since many of those who had been banished from their tribes would turn to the religion. Many converts would also be found in others, such as Nwoye, who had been affected by some or other painful trauma related to their own religion or culture.

When the missionaries were given land in the Evil Forest, many thought they would die, but they persevered and nothing happened to them. It was believed that they had a very powerful fetish and more converts were won. In this way, the missionaries gained more support, creating greater division amongst the villagers. The culture and beliefs of the natives were gradually being eroded in this manner.

The colonialists also introduced a new form of government and installed District Commissioners who introduced and exercised new laws. Certain cultural practices were outlawed, such as abandoning newborn twins in the evil forest. The perpetrators were arrested and imprisoned and were forced to perform menial tasks under guard. More serious crimes were punished by hanging. This form of control had a slow and debilitating effect on the villagers, which caused even more people to turn to the new faith, giving up their tradition.

Another factor which won many new converts, specifically in Umuofia, was the kindness and patience of Mr. Brown, the white missionary. He made the villagers believe that there was some value in the new faith, after all. He built a school and hospital in the village and, as the extracts below indicate, he won more and more support.

In the end Mr. Brown's arguments began to have an effect. More people came to learn in his school, and he encouraged them with gifts of singlets and towels.

And it was not long before the people began to say that the white man's medicine was quick in working.

It is in these ways that support for the white man's laws and his religion grew. Okonkwo was one of very few who saw the threat of the destruction of their culture. He was prepared to fight for his culture, but most did not have his fiery passion or conviction and gradually, Ibo culture was swallowed by a new belief system and a new government.

Okonkwo's suicide symbolizes the death of Ibo culture. He killed himself not only out of pride but also because he was not prepared to be dominated and ruled by something he could never accept. He would rather commit an abomination than commit to one.

Explain how Mary Maloney, Patrick, the detective, the unborn child, the leg of the lamb could be the 'lamb to the slaughter.'

The title of the story suggests that there is more than one meaning implied. It could be a double-entendre, or a triple-entendre (if there is such a thing), or a quadruple-entendre. Patrick is a big, tough cop, but he is the most obvious "lamb" to the slaughter because he actually is slaughtered. And he is slaughtered like an innocent lamb because he has no idea what is going to happen to him. He is innocent in another sense. He doesn't understand his wife at all--so he doesn't suspect that it is a bad idea to have his back turned to her, especially at that juncture.

Mary is very much like a lamb, at least up until the time that she succumbs to a fit of rage and bashes her unsuspecting husband over the head with the frozen leg of lamb. She is meek, mild, innocent, trusting, passive, and totally naive. It almost seems as if her whole world is her little house, the neighborhood grocery story, and the restaurant to which her husband takes her once a week. She trusts in Patrick like a little lamb--until he tells her what is on his mind.

The frozen leg of lamb, which is the centerpiece of the story, could be "the lamb to the slaughter" because it actually is a lamb and because it actually goes to the slaughter of Patrick Maloney. Without the leg of lamb there would probably have been no slaughter. Mary would not have gone to seek a weapon. She only committed the deed because she happened to have the perfect weapon in her hand.

The unborn child is like a lamb because, like a lamb, it is a baby. It is curled up peacefully inside its mother's womb. It is completely innocent. Nevertheless, it plays an important part in the "slaughter" of its father, for if Mary were not six months pregnant, and if she were not looking forward to motherhood and a happy domestic life, she probably would not have reacted to her husband's rejection with such savage rage. 

So Mary, Patrick, the unborn baby, and the frozen leg of lamb are not just "likely suspects" but are all simultaneously involved in the "slaughter" of Patrick Maloney. The choice of the title is brilliant. It is also comical, which is characteristic of Roald Dahl. Being funny, the title suggests that the whole story is not to be taken too seriously. The reader can't help being amused by the picture of a woman killing her husband with a frozen leg of lamb, and the reader can't help being amused by the final scene in which Mary gets the policemen to devour the incriminating evidence.

How does Shakespeare present the character of Lady Macbeth and establish the potential for future conflict in Act I, Scene 5 of Macbeth?

In Act I, Scene 5, Lady Macbeth receives a letter from her husband describing his encounter with the witches and their prophecy that he will become king of Scotland. She is presented as a devoted wife, willing to abandon whatever scruples she has to help her husband achieve what they view as his destiny. When she discovers King Duncan will be at their castle, she immediately resolves to "unsex" herself, becoming ruthless and cruel in order to push Macbeth, who she views as "too full of the milk of human kindness" to carry out the murder that will put him on the throne. She is also remarkably assertive. No sooner does she learn Duncan will be staying at Inverness that night then she begins to hatch a plan to kill him. She tells Macbeth what to do, advising him to greet Duncan with great hospitality so as not to reveal their plot:

bear welcome in your eye,
Your hand, your tongue; look like the innocent flower,
But be the serpent under't.

Beyond that, she tells Macbeth, he should "leave the rest to me," meaning Macbeth should simply act normal while she plans the brutal and treasonous murder of the king. Lady Macbeth's actions would have been viewed by Shakespeare's audiences as not only devious and cruel, but as an inversion of the natural order of things. This is certainly how she is presented in this scene, and it is consistent with the theme originally described by the witches: what's fair is foul and what's foul is fair. Yet the modern audience might be equally struck by Lady Macbeth's love and ambition for her husband as well as her willingness to defy prescribed gender roles. As for the potential for conflict, it is obvious the couple is plotting to kill the King, an act that will plunge Scotland into bloody chaos.

How does Macbeth discuss what it means to be human and have a conscience?

Macbeth is fully aware of his conscience. Guilt and fear occur to him almost immediately after he considers killing the king. He must really work up to killing Duncan. His wife encourages him but in the end, he must psyche himself into a mental state to overcome his fear and future guilt. At the end of Act I, Scene 4, Macbeth has not yet killed Duncan. But he is already trying to hide his murderous thoughts: 

Stars, hide your fires; 

Let not light see my black and deep desires. 

The eye wink at the hand; yet let that be

Which the eye fears, when it is done, to see. (I.iv.57-60) 

He doesn't want the stars shed light on his evil thoughts. He is afraid for the "eye" to see what he is thinking and what he might do. One could interpret that Macbeth is afraid of what God or other people think of him. But this idea of hiding his guilt has to do his own conscience. It's as if he doesn't want his own "eye" (mind or conscience) to see or acknowledge the evil that he is considering. So, to be human, is to wrestle with one's own urges and ethics. This is a Freudian analysis in the sense that Macbeth is wrestling with his own superego and Id: his respective reason and "deep desires." Macbeth feels at the mercy of a war between his conscience and his desires. 

Because Macbeth never masters his urges and emotions, he blames fate and circumstance. He feels more like a puppet than a person. He is never able to use his free will and conscience to override his urges. Therefore, he concludes that his free will had been an illusion. Here is part of his famous nihilistic quote in Act V, Scene 5: 

Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player 

That struts and frets his hour upon the stage 

And then is heard no more. It is a tale 

Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, 

Signifying nothing. (V.v.26-30) 

Macbeth feels like an actor. His life had been scripted and therefore his own will has meant nothing. Having never mastered his own reason and desires, in the end he feels like life is simply a matter or being manipulated. 

`f(x) = arctan(e^x)` Find the derivative of the function

The given function: `f(x) =arctan(e^x)`  is in a form of inverse trigonometric function.

It can be evaluated using the derivative formula for inverse of tangent function:

`d/(dx)arctan(u) = ((du)/(dx))/(1+x^2)` .

 We  let `u = e^x` then  `(du)/(dx)= d/(dx) (e^x)= e^x` .

Applying the the formula, we get:

`f'(x)= d/(dx) arctan(e^x)`

          `=e^x/(1 +(e^x)^2)`

Using the law of exponent: `(x^n)^m=x^(n*m)` , we may simplify the part:

`(e^x)^2 = e^((x*2)) = e^(2x)`

The derivative of the function` f(x) = arctan(e^x)` becomes:

`f'(x)= e^x/(1 +e^(2x)) ` as the Final Answer.

In "The Umbrella," what kind of woman is Madame Oreille?

In the story, Madame Oreille is a miserly woman. Her chief preoccupation in life is to save money, and she is a tyrant to her husband in this regard. Monsieur Oreille is hardly allowed to have any pocket money at all, and he lives in constant fear of his wife's shrewish temper.

Although Madame Oreille and her husband have no children and can live comfortably, Madame Oreille's fear of future want prevents her from fully enjoying her present circumstances. The author describes Madame Oreille as a "little woman of about forty, very active, rather hasty, wrinkled, very neat and tidy, and with a very short temper."

Madame Oreille's short temper is frequently trained on her husband. When Monsieur Oreille protests that he is tired of using the cheap and flimsy umbrella she bought to replace his old one, Madame Oreille becomes angry. She eventually buys him a new, more expensive one, albeit accompanied by a lecture that it will not be replaced in a hurry if his new one is ruined through carelessness on his part.

As time progresses, Monsieur Oreille's umbrella is soon mysteriously found to be burned in different places. As for his part, Monsieur Oreille cannot explain how the burns occurred. Madame Oreille, furious at her husband, refuses to replace the umbrella. There is a stalemate between the two until a family friend advises Madame Oreille to seek compensation from their fire insurance company.

Madame Oreille is reluctant to do so initially, but she soon relents. In the conversation between Madame Oreille and the insurance men, Madame Oreille is seen to be a calculating opportunist, who will resort to fabrications in order to save herself the expense of replacing a ruined umbrella; she is quite happy for her husband to have a newer, sturdier umbrella if someone else will foot the costs for what she considers a frivolous expense.

What is the rising action and climax to the story Moby Dick?

The rising action are the points in the plot and the description of characters that lead to suspense and to the climax. In Moby Dick, much of the book contains the rising action, starting with Captain Ahab's appearance on the deck of the Pequod to announce his intention to kill the whale who caused him to have a missing leg. The rising action also includes the part of the book in which other ships cross the Pequod's path, including the Jeroboam of Nantucket, on which a sailor announces that he is the archangel Gabriel. This man issues terrible prophecies to Captain Ahab, such as "Think, think of thy whale-boat, stoven and sunk! Beware of the horrible tail!" The crew of this other ship recount an incident in which the mate of the Jeroboam was tossed into the air and drowned when the white shadow of the whale appeared, while the boat was not harmed. Nonetheless, Captain Ahab pushes ahead in his quest to find Moby Dick. 

Later, continuing the rising action of the plot, the Pequod meets another ship called the Samuel Enderby of London, and a sailor on this ship tells Ahab the story of the loss of his arm to what he calls the "White Whale." The rising action also includes numerous mentions of the word "coffin," as Queequeg has a coffin built for him when he thinks he is dying (later the coffin becomes the way in which Ishmael is rescued from the sinking Pequod). The frequent mentions of the image of a coffin contribute to the rising action, as they foreshadow the death that is to follow for the ship's crew.

The climax to the story is Captain Ahab's final encounter with Moby Dick. This is the resolution of the rising action, as Ahab finally tries to kill the whale who is his nemesis and winds up causing the deaths of himself and all of his crew, save Ishmael.