Why is glass a good insulator?

An insulator is a material that does not conduct heat or electricity. In comparison, conductors are the materials that conduct electricity and/or heat. Aluminum is a good conductor of heat and electricity. Glass, on the other hand, is an insulator and so is rubber.

To conduct electricity, a material must possess free electrons. For example, metals have free electrons and these "delocalized" electrons conduct the electricity. That is why metals are generally good conductors. In comparison, a material like glass has no free electrons and in the absence of free or delocalized electrons, it is unable to conduct electricity. We can also say that all the electrons are tightly bound around the atoms in the case of glass, leaving no free electrons for conducting electricity. 

Glass was commonly used as an insulator in older times. These days rubber is a more commonly used insulator. That is the reason we have rubber coating on electrical wires. It is also suggested to wear shoes and gloves while working with electrical connections. 

Hope this helps. 

How can I analyze Fromm’s basic needs? How can I rank the needs from most important to least important? How can I write a paper of...

Drawing primarily from the late Erich Fromm’s (1900-1980) The Heart of Man: Its Genius for Good and Evil, The Art of Loving, and Man for Himself: An Inquiry into the Psychology of Ethics, one can typically extrapolate the following basic human needs that differentiate, by and large, human beings from other species of animal:

• Relatedness: The most basic of human (psychological) needs and built around the ability of humans to form bonds with each other—bonds that include love for other humans and the forging of hierarchical relationships between and among individuals while retaining each individual’s unique identity;


• Transcendence: The unique ability of humans to rise above their circumstances by transcending the natural world. This “need” encapsulates Fromm’s emphasis on the duality of human nature (i.e., man’s proclivity for acting in both positive and negative ways);


• Rootedness: Fromm believed fervently that humans need to stake roots in their environment—in effect, to feel at home and secure in their surroundings;


• Sense of Identity: Similar to the need for “relatedness,” Fromm’s philosophical perspective recognized a basic human need for individuality and for a personal sense of identity. Each individual has an innate need to differentiate his- or herself from others. This “need” contradicts the sense of relatedness in that it reaffirms the need to maintain one’s personal identity simultaneous with the need to belong to a larger group;


• Frame of Orientation: Basically, a restatement of man’s existential need to understand his place in the cosmos. Personally, I like the way Fromm summarized this “need” early in Man for Himself: “. . .human personality cannot be understood unless we look at man in his totality, which includes his need to find an answer to the question of the meaning of his existence and to discover norms according to which he ought to live.”


• Excitation and Stimulation: An add-on for some scholars of Fromm, this refers to man’s innate “need” to identify goals and work towards their attainment.

Now that Fromm’s basic human needs have been identified, we can proceed to analyze and rank them, although the latter task is very subjective and the individual student should do that him- or herself.

When analyzing Fromm’s basic human needs, it is reasonable to note that some of these needs are less unique to humans than this rather brilliant philosopher/psychoanalyst seemed to suggest. The more we learn of certain animal species, whether gorillas or elephants or dolphins, or certain other animal species, the more we recognize in them—such as the bond between mother and child and the importance of the group—basic needs similar or identical to those of humans. Where Fromm is correct, however, is in the more destructive or negative of those needs, such as with respect to transcendence, or the need (which could be considered less a need than a want) to defeat or destroy our natural surroundings for our own narcissistic benefit. Fromm is also correct, to the extent we can truly understand other species, in his emphasis on a frame of orientation. To the best of our knowledge, no other species ponders, as do humans, their place in the world or the universe. The history of humanity, however, does seem to largely validate Fromm’s views regarding humanity.

Regarding the student’s assignment, the more personal the response the better. This, then, requires some level of introspection—ironically, one of Fromm’s basic human needs. In this, we continue to question the validity of the concept of “need” as opposed to “want.” Humans can be said to genuinely need a sense of community and a sense of being rooted in one’s environment. One need not, however, be particularly introspective with regard to one’s place in the universe. Existentialism is, after all, not for everyone, and certainly excludes a wide variety of psychopaths whose actions occur in complete disregard for others and for their surroundings. Indeed, self-absorption is a prevailing characteristic of many individuals (and it is important to keep in mind Fromm’s emphasis on both good and evil as being innately human), and one could consider the role of modern information technologies in driving individuals deeper into their own selves with diminishing senses of situational awareness. In any event, there is no doubt that certain needs, such as that for a sense of community, take precedence over others, such as a frame of orientation.

What can occur when one of these needs goes unmet? Well, for those lacking in a sense of excitation and stimulation, mental and professional stagnation would certainly result, but that’s okay for many who are content in their lives working what some of us consider menial, dull jobs.

Are there needs that adults are still trying to meet? Depending upon your geographic location and individual and social circumstances, self-preservation is in itself a higher priority than existentialist rumination regarding our place in the universe. Refugees fleeing wars in Syria and the Democratic Republic of the Congo are less inclined to think in terms of their frame of orientation than in simply staying alive. Even with such people, however, one can apply the rest of Fromm’s “needs,” only at a different scale than for the more affluent, materialistic American for whom self-preservation is largely a given and goals revolve more around the usual things like a bigger house, better car, and newer computer system. Fromm certainly associated the concept of “greed” with the less-attractive of human needs, it being “the bottomless pit which exhausts the person in an effort to satisfy the need without ever reaching satisfaction.” When discussing “needs,” it is, after, all relative.

The most commonly unmet need in “our” society is probably that of transcendence. While debates over climate change and the impact of human conduct on the environment are ongoing, one can certainly argue that humans continue to struggle to overcome natural obstacles to the attainment of their wants, whether in terms of environmental degradation resulting from subsistence agricultural practices or from industrial polluting, or from man’s failure to date to reconcile laws of physics with an insatiable curiosity about the universe. Humans continue to seek ways to explore the cosmos despite budgetary and technological limitations and the fact of having to reconcile the lifespan of the normal human being with the vast, almost incomprehensible distances involved in exploring space. Out-of-work miners in northern Minnesota continue to exhibit an innate need for rootedness despite environmental degradation associated with their means of survival and the fiscal realities of commodity pricing in a globalized world. They demand the rest of society conform to their limited objectives rather than sacrifice their sense of community and rootedness.

Differentiating genuine needs from wants is a singular challenge in discussing Fromm’s list of human needs. Often, individuals and societies fail to draw such distinctions, defining their own wants as needs and demanding the rest of society conform to their ideals. In this sense, Fromm was absolutely correct in his emphasis on the bad that comes with the good.

Which country launched the world's first man-made satellite, Sputnik, into Earth's orbit on October 4, 1957?

Sputnik, the world's first man-made satellite, was launched by the Soviet Union in 1957. This came as a surprise to the United States, who had announced in 1955 that they intended to launch a satellite during the International Geophysical Year (IGY). The period of July 1, 1957, to December 31, 1958 had been designated as the IGY in 1952, due to the predicted increase in solar activity during that time. While the United States solicited input from other countries in order to produce the technology required to launch a satellite, the Soviet Union kept their research secret. When they launched Sputnik--a much larger satellite than the one planned by the United States--and then a month later Sputnik II (larger still, and carrying a dog), the US and its allies were uneasy. A successful launch of that size could also mean a military advantage for the USSR. In January 1958 the US successfully launched Explorer I, and the space race was on.

Can I get a summary of the poem "The Vaccum" by Howard Nemerov?

"The Vacuum" by Howard Nemerov is told from the perspective of an older man who is a widower.  He misses his dead wife.  He is impacted by her absence, and he sheds light on his feelings through the object of a vacuum cleaner.  The title "The Vacuum" also refers to the void left by his wife's absence.

The poem opens with the words "It is so quiet now."  The man then states that "the vacuum cleaner sulks in the corner closet."  The quiet is referring to the fact that his wife is no longer in the house.  The house is also quiet because his wife is no longer there to run the loud vacuum cleaner.  The man remembers what a meticulous housekeeper his wife was.   When he does turn on the vacuum cleaner, he thinks of his wife and how meticulously she cleaned "in the corner and under the stair."  He cannot stand to run the vacuum cleaner because it causes him to remember and miss her.

Is the goal of education to "put sight into blind eyes", according to Plato?

In Plato's Allegory of the Cave, he argues against the belief that education is like "putting sight into blind eyes." In the text, the character of Socrates argues that the ability to learn is an inherent human trait; in other words, teachers do not provide students with the skills to seek knowledge because all people are born with that ability. A better metaphor for this interpretation of education is that the role of education is to point students towards the truth and improve the focus of their sight. The role of the teacher is to teach the student how to discover truth, so that learning skills are made relevant. This is an important argument within the text, because it shows Socrates' belief that anyone can become a philosopher; if learning and truth-seeking are inherent human traits, and the role of the teacher is only to focus these traits, that means that anyone is capable of benefiting equally from education.

How is Nick Carraway, from The Great Gatsby, shallow?

It could be argued that Nick's shallowness is exemplified by his own aspirations and self-image; he purchases books on finance and wealth in an effort to become "that most limited of all specialists, the 'well-rounded' man," and he considers himself to be a great judge of character, "snobbishly repeat[ing]" that he possesses a disproportionate amount of the "fundamental decencies" that others presumably lack.

Finally, his shallowness can be seen in the quickness with which he dismisses his own doubts about Gatsby's background.  Skeptical to the point of "incredulity" when Gatsby recounts his life story in chapter four, Nick abruptly determines that "it was all true" as soon as Gatsby produces a medal and a photograph. Only minutes earlier, Nick could barely "restrain [his] incredulous laughter" at Gatsby's preposterous past, but the photo of Gatsby with a "cricket bat in his hand" is all it takes to convince him that he indeed lived the romantic and heroic life of an adventurer, soldier, and scholar.  

In short, Nick Carraway seems so blinded by Gatsby's trappings of wealth and romance that he willfully ignores his moral transgressions, and this could be seen as "shallowness" on Nick's part.

Where does Leslie want to go with Jess and his family in Bridge to Terabithia by Katherine Paterson?

Leslie wants to go to church with Jess and his family. 

Jess's family does not go to church often. Chapter eight tells readers that the Aarons family only attends church on Easter, and it is a big deal. It is an especially big deal for Brenda and Ellie because they are excited to show off new clothes. It's obvious they are missing the point of church.  

Jess is not thrilled to go to church. He claims he never gets much out of going to church, which is why Leslie's request to join his family surprises him so much. Jess can't fathom a reason why Leslie would want to go to church. 

He went back to work. "You'd hate it."

"Why?"

"It's boring."

Leslie does indeed end up joining the Aaron family for the Easter Sunday service, and she loves it. She finds everything about the service fascinating, and she sees the story of Jesus's sacrifice as storybook beautiful.  

"All those people wanting to kill him when he hadn't done anything to hurt them." She hesitated. "It's really kind of a beautiful story — like Abraham Lincoln or Socrates — or Aslan."

What did Mr. Nuttel see when he looked out of the open window? What do you think he felt and how did he react?

The author describes exactly what Framton Nuttel saw when he looked through the open French window.

In the deepening twilight three figures were walking across the lawn towards the window, they all carried guns under their arms, and one of them was additionally burdened with a white coat hung over his shoulders. A tired brown spaniel kept close at their heels. Noiselessly they neared the house, and then a hoarse young voice chanted out of the dusk: "I said, Bertie, why do you bound?"

Because of "the deepening twilight," the three figures would conceivably look somewhat "ghostlike," as if they were transparent and shimmering. Vera had prepared Framton to recognize them as the three supposedly dead hunters. They are all carrying guns. One of them has a white coat hung over his shoulders. Vera told Framson:

Poor dear aunt, she has often told me how they went out, her husband with his white waterproof coat over his arm, and Ronnie, her youngest brother, singing "Bertie, why do you bound?" as he always did to tease her, because she said it got on her nerves. 

Bertie's idiotic song will get on Framton's nerves, too. Vera also mentioned the "little brown spaniel" that was lost with them. All these distinguishing clues make Framton sure these must be the three dead men who have somehow managed to free themselves from the bog after three years and are returning for tea, just as Mrs. Sappleton expected.

The author has created the perfect victim for Vera's practical joke. Framton is suffering from what we would now call a severe neurosis. He is only present at the Sappleton household because he has come down to the country for a "nerve cure." It is because he is so nervous that he responds so vigorously. He is terrified. The fact that the three "ghosts" are all carrying guns makes them even more frightening. Ghosts would be bad enough; ghosts carrying guns are even worse. 

Vera has twice been described as "self-possessed." What triggers Framton's extreme reaction to the approaching hunters is the girl's feigned look of horror. She loses all her self-possession and appears to be seeing the same men her supposedly demented aunt has been expecting for three years. Everything works out perfectly for Vera's joke. Bertie breaks into song. Her aunt says everything she was expected to say.

"Here they are at last!" she cried. "Just in time for tea, and don't they look as if they were muddy up to the eyes!"

Framton shivered slightly and turned towards the niece with a look intended to convey sympathetic comprehension. The child was staring out through the open window with a dazed horror in her eyes. 

The reader isn't let in on the joke until Framton has gone running for dear life up the country road. Just like Framton Nuttel, the reader is beguiled into believing the three men approaching the open window in the deepening twilight are ghosts. It isn't until Mr. Sappleton enters through the window that the reader realizes it was all a set-up for poor Framton Nuttel.

"Here we are, my dear," said the bearer of the white mackintosh, coming in through the window, "fairly muddy, but most of it's dry. Who was that who bolted out as we came up?"

"A most extraordinary man, a Mr. Nuttel," said Mrs. Sappleton; "could only talk about his illnesses, and dashed off without a word of goodby or apology when you arrived. One would think he had seen a ghost."

Justify the title of the book The Story of My Life by Helen Keller.

The book The Story of My Life is an autobiography about the life of Helen Keller.  The title tells exactly what it is about.  Helen writes about the real events in her life in a narrative form.  She tells about her experiences as a deaf and blind person, as well as about her innovative education.  She writes about her life from birth until her early twenties in the book.  

Helen describes her autobiography as being "the history of [her] life."  In writing her book, Helen had to decide what parts of her life to include and what not to include.  She attempts "to present in a series of sketches only the episodes that seem... to be the most interesting and important."  For example, Helen summarizes the first seven years of her life in three chapters.  She writes in detail about the next year of her life (the first year that Miss Sullivan was her teacher) in chapters four through eight.

What did Alexander Hamilton mean when he called the courts "the least dangerous branch"? In light of the judicial review powers assumed by the...

Hamilton considered the judiciary the "least dangerous branch" because he believed it was the least likely to usurp too much power for itself and thereby undermine the checks and balances of the government. He most feared the executive branch, because he worried that a charismatic President might rally enough support to his cause that he could give himself powers far beyond what the Constitution intended.

He was probably right about the executive branch; Presidents have steadily grown in their power since the founding of the United States, particularly with regard to warfare. The Constitution says that Congress must declare war, but no US military action since 1945 has been accompanied by a formal declaration of war by Congress. Congress has signed off on a number of military actions since then, including the Vietnam War, Iraq War and Afghanistan War, but never formally declared war; and in many other military interventions Congress had no involvement whatsoever, such as the invasion of Grenada, the bombing of Libya, and the ongoing drone war in Syria.

But he may have been wrong to think that Congress would try to attain extra power, whereas the Supreme Court would not. The Supreme Court has expanded its power quite substantially, starting with officially affirming its authority to conduct judicial review in 1803, and continuing through a series of landmark Supreme Court decisions that have shaped US policy just as thoroughly as if they had been passed as legislation by Congress---from the desegregation of schools in 1954 to the legalization of same-sex marriage in 2015. One could argue that they are just interpreting the Constitution as it ought to be (and it's hard to disagree with these particular rulings!), but it really does seem like they are actually expanding the meaning of past legislation to encompass broader groups of people, sort of saying what the law should have said rather than what it actually did or was intended to say.

This is problematic because the Supreme Court is not elected, and once appointed they are in place for life; this makes them clearly the least-democratic of all the branches of government. Hamilton may actually have seen this as a good thing; he was a bit dubious of giving the people too much power over government. But is it really a good thing? Even if we may agree with the outcomes, do we really want such important decisions being made with little or no public input?

Provide full character sketches of all the characters in Three Men in a Boat.

J. is the narrator. If he has a “real” job, he doesn’t tell us what it is. He’s an avid storyteller who likes to add humor and exaggeration to every tale. He gets distracted by stories he’s reminded of, at every turn. He admits that he’s lazy. In Chapter XV, he famously says: “I like work: it fascinates me. I can sit and look at it for hours.” And yet, he seems to be the unofficial leader of this group of friends.

William Stanley Harris doesn’t seem to hold a “real” job, either. In today’s terms, we may consider him to be a high maintenance friend, and one who can sap everyone else's strengths, if given the chance. He’s confident that he can do certain tasks, and it eventually turns out that he can’t. In Chapter XI, he makes an unsuccessful attempt at cooking scrambled eggs for breakfast for the group.

George works at a bank. He has to work early on the first day of the trip, so J. and Harris have to pick him up en route. He seems to be more organized and focused than the other two friends; although at times, like them, he can become confused or clumsy. In Chapter XVII, he accidentally knocks down the mounted fish on the wall of the inn. But he does cook a good Irish stew in Chapter XIV.

Montmorency is the fox terrier who serves as the dog on the trip and in the book title. Looks can be deceiving. He looks like an amiable enough and mellow animal. But he likes to chase cats. He likes to bring dead things back to his friends. He likes to get in the way when people are busy with a complex task, as he does when the men are packing in Chapter IV. Here he is treated as a worthy fourth member of the group, however.

`int dx/(x(sqrt(4x^2-1)))` Find the indefinite integral

We have to evaluate the integral : ```\int \frac{dx}{x\sqrt{4x^2-1}}`

Let `\sqrt{4x^2-1}=u`

So, `\frac{1}{2\sqrt{4x^2-1}}.8x dx=du`

      `\frac{4xdx}{\sqrt{4x^2-1}}=du`

       `\frac{dx}{\sqrt{4x^2-1}}=\frac{du}{4x}`

Hence we have,

`\int \frac{dx}{x\sqrt{4x^2-1}}=\int \frac{du}{4x^2}`

                 `=\int \frac{du}{u^2+1}`

                  `=tan^{-1}(u)+C`

                   `=tan^{-1}(\sqrt{4x^2-1})+C` where C is a constant

`arctanx + arctan(1/x) = pi/2 , x>0` Verify each identity

We will use the following formula:

`arctan(1/x)=pi/2-arctan(x),` if `x >0`

If we apply the above formula to the left side of our expression we get

`arctan(x)+arctan(1/x)=arctan(x)+pi/2-arctan(x)=pi/2`

                                                                                                          Q.E.D.

One should note that the formula from the beginning holds only for positive numbers. For negative numbers we have a slightly different formula holds.

`arctan(1/x)=-pi/2-arctan(x),` if `x<0`                                     

What are bile and villi? What is their use in the digestive system?

Bile is a substance produced by the liver and stored in the gall bladder—a small organ attached to the liver.

The purpose of bile is to allow digestive enzymes called lipases to be able to hydrolyze or break down fats.  When a meal is eaten, bile stored in the gall bladder is released and enters the small intestine via the bile duct. In the presence of fat molecules, it acts to break up these large molecules into smaller droplets in a process called emulsification.  This allows more surface area for fat enzymes (lipases) to act on aiding in the process of digestion.

Villi are tiny finger-like projections found in the lining of the small intestine. Their purpose is to aid in the absorption of the end products of digestion. These tiny projections greatly increase the surface area for absorption of nutrients into the circulating blood and lymph systems. The villi are one-cell thick, which allows for diffusion to occur. Capillaries within the villi absorb amino acids and monosaccharides while the lacteals inside the villi absorb the end products of fat digestion. Capillaries are tiny blood vessels and lacteals are part of the lymph system. Eventually, all of the end products of digestion are circulated in the body and transported to the cells that need them.

I have included links showing the small intestinal lining and the anatomy of a villus.

`int_0^a x^2 sqrt(a^2 - x^2) dx` Evaluate the integral

`int_0^ax^2sqrt(a^2-x^2)dx`

Let's evaluate the indefinite integral by applying integral substitution,

Let `x=asin(u)`

`dx=acos(u)du`

`intx^2sqrt(a^2-x^2)dx=int(asin(u))^2sqrt(a^2-(asin(u))^2)acos(u)du`

`=inta^2sin^2(u)sqrt(a^2-a^2sin^2(u))acos(u)du`

`=a^3intsin^2(u)cos(u)sqrt(a^2(1-sin^2(u)))du`

`=a^3intsin^2(u)cos(u)asqrt(1-sin^2(u))du` 

Now use the identity:`1-sin^2(x)=cos^2(x)`

`=a^4intsin^2(u)cos(u)sqrt(cos^2(u))du`

`=a^4intsin^2(u)cos^2(u)du`

Now use the identity:`cos^2(x)sin^2(x)=(1-cos(4x))/8`

`=a^4int(1-cos(4u))/8du`

`=a^4/8int(1-cos(4u)du`

`=a^4/8(int1du-intcos(4u)du)`

`=a^4/8(u-sin(4u)/4)`

Substitute back `u=arcsin(x/a)`

`=a^4/8(arcsin(x/a)-sin(4arcsin(x/a))/4)`

add a constant C to the solution,

`=a^4/8(arcsin(x/a)-1/4sin(4arcsin(x/a)))+C`

Now let's evaluate the definite integral,

`int_0^ax^2sqrt(a^2-x^2)dx=[a^4/8(arcsin(x/a)-1/4sin(4arcsin(x/a)))]_0^a`

`=[a^4/8(arcsin(a/a)-1/4sin(4arcsin(a/a)))]-[a^4/8(arcsin(0/a)-1/4sin(4arcsin(0/a)))]`

`=[a^4/8(arcsin(1)-1/4sin(4arcsin(1)))]-[a^4/8(arcsin(0)-1/4sin(4arcsin(0)))]`

`=[a^4/8(pi/2-1/4sin(4*pi/2))]-[a4/8(0-1/4sin(4*0))]`

`=[a^4/8(pi/2-1/4sin(2pi))]-[0]`

`=[a^4/8(pi/2-1/4(0))]`

`=a^4/8(pi/2)`

`=(pia^4)/16`

In David Rabe's play The Basic Training of Pavlo Hummel, why does the title character hold onto the grenade and allow it to explode in his hands?

It is a moot point whether Pavlo deliberately holds onto the grenade, "allowing" it to explode, which, if true, would constitute his second suicide attempt in the play. After all, the grenade is thrown into the room through a window, and an attempt to dispose of it by tossing it back is not completely unreasonable. After the grenade mortally wounds Pavlo, his alter-ego, Ardell, questions the stupidity of his action. Pavlo responds that he was thinking about "throwin' it", highlighting his lack of forethought about the potentially devastating consequences of his action. However, his response also indicates that he didn't have a conscious death wish because he did intend to get rid of the grenade. The fact that Pavlo chooses to handle the grenade at all is arguably a function of his 'basic training'; the army has instilled a value system equating masculinity and success with action, resulting in the suppression of personal awareness to institutional (military) expectations. In this sense, Pavlo is compelled to seize the grenade without consideration of cause and effect because that would be considered a passive, 'soft' reaction. Basic training has muted Pavlo's autonomous decision making so that his thoughts and actions more closely subscribe to the mold of hyper-masculine soldier. 

What moment might be called the climax in Act 5 of Shakespeare's Macbeth? What is clear to the audience and to Macbeth at this point?

The most climactic moment of Act 5 is when Macbeth and Macduff face off, and Macbeth realizes that he is doomed. 

Macbeth really takes an emotional roller coaster during this play.  He goes from really wanting to be king to killing Duncan and then worrying that he will be found out.  After that, he descends into a madness of guilt and paranoia.  By Act 5, his wife has died and soldiers are pouring at him from all angles.  

The witches told him that he needed to worry about the forest coming to him, and it turns out that, in a way, it does.  Malcolm has his men cut down branches to hide their approach.  He is also told that no man born of woman can hurt him in one breath and to beware Macduff in another.  Thus by the time he meets Macduff in battle, he is a mess. 

The climactic or most exciting and meaningful moment of the play is when Macduff confronts Macbeth, and clears up the mystery.

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.

MACBETH

Accursed be that tongue that tells me so,
For it hath cow'd my better part of man! (Act 5, Scene 8) 

It turns out that Macduff was born by some kind of Caesarean-section, so he technically was not born in the traditional sense.  There you go.  It is clear to the audience that Macbeth is completely deflated after hearing this. He feels betrayed and loses his fighting spirit.  It is not hard for Macduff to take him out.  He does so by beheading him. 

There is not much more to the play after that.  Malcolm’s soldiers make short work of whatever remains of Macbeth’s forces, and Malcolm declares the tyrant killed and the war over, taking his rightful place at the throne.

What did Atticus think Mayella did wrong in chapter twenty of To Kill A Mockingbird?

Atticus, in his summing up, says that Mayella Ewell has "put a man's life at stake" (i.e., Tom Robinson's), "in an effort to get rid of her own guilt."

He then clarifies that Mayella was not guilty of a crime, but she was guilty of breaking a rigid social code:

"... a code so severe that whoever breaks it is hounded from our midst as unfit to live with. ... She was white, and she tempted a Negro.  She did something that in our society is unspeakable: she kissed a black man.  Not an old Uncle, but a strong young Negro man.  No code mattered to her before she broke it, but it came crashing down on her afterwards."

Notice that Atticus does not say this social code is right, merely that Mayella Ewell knew she was "guilty" of breaking it.  He goes on to say that, in order to escape the severe consequences that would come her way if she admitted what she'd done (social ostracism, and probably more savage beatings from her father), Mayella desperately tried to blame Tom Robinson by accusing him of rape.  

Atticus has great sympathy for Mayella.  He knows she leads a lonely life, and that Tom Robinson was the only person in her world who was kind to her.  He understands why she was tempted.  However, he cannot spare her feelings by keeping her secret.  He must bring her secret out in order to save Tom Robinson's life. 

The the book Hoot, how did Roy feel about Mullet Fingers?

Roy's feelings about Mullet Fingers change as the book progresses, so I can't state a single feeling.  I can do it in two general feelings though.  

The first feeling that Roy has about Mullet Fingers is curiosity.  The first time that Roy sees Mullet Fingers is from the bus.  Roy is being bullied by Dana Matherson, and Roy sees Mullet Fingers running shoeless next to the bus.  Roy's head is immediately filled with a bunch of questions.  Who is that kid?  Why no shoes?  Roy vows to find answers to his questions.  His curiosity only grows when he sees Mullet Fingers again and is told by Beatrice Leep to leave the kid alone.  

Roy eventually learns who Mullet Fingers is and why he is living in the woods.  Roy also learns that it is Mullet Fingers who is causing all of the construction problems in order to protect the owls.  With all of his questions answered, Roy's feelings toward Mullet Fingers change from curiosity to friendship and respect.  Roy even joins Mullet Fingers's crusade to save the owls.  

Why was the protagonist so curious about the other sniper? Why did he go out into the street to look at him?

The sniper went to look at the enemy sniper because the protagonist sniper thought that he might know the enemy sniper.  

The reason that the protagonist might actually know the enemy sniper is because Ireland is currently involved in a civil war.  This means that the country is divided.  

Republicans and Free Staters were waging civil war.

A civil war will not only polarize the civilian population, but it will also polarize and likely split the armed forces.  Certain soldiers and leaders will fight for one side of the conflict, and others will fight for the other side of the conflict.  It is possible that the protagonist sniper was in the same unit as the enemy sniper.  Readers are told that the sniper believes his enemy to be a good shot, which he respects.  The text says that the sniper is curious about the man's identity because the two might know each other, but I also think he went to look at the body out of respect for the dead.  He wants to put a face with the enemy whose skill he respects.  

When the sniper reached the laneway on the street level, he felt a sudden curiosity as to the identity of the enemy sniper whom he had killed. He decided that he was a good shot, whoever he was. He wondered did he know him. Perhaps he had been in his own company before the split in the army.

What are our obligations as citizens? How does liberalism, as presented by Locke and Kant, view our obligations?

Liberalism is largely based on the idea that all men are free, but with that freedom comes a certain set of obligations. While each culture varies on the nature of those obligations, there are some basic obligations that all citizens are believed to possess according to the philosophies of Kant and Locke.

According to the philosophy of John Locke, all men are entitled to pursue life, liberty and property. With those rights come general obligations that apply to all citizens as well as specialized obligations that must be undertaken voluntarily. Locke believed that those obligations came into effect when one willingly became part of a society and implicitly consented to the rules of that society. For example, Locke believed that resident aliens have an obligation to obey the laws of the states in which they reside and that those who inherit property have the obligation to obey the rules of the commonwealth in which that property is located.

Like most liberal philosophers, Locke also believed that all citizens have the responsibility of preserving the basic rights and others. For example, citizens are entitled to maintain their own property and obligated not to infringe on the rights of another citizen to own his or her own property. Unlike other liberal philosophers, most of Locke's writings indicate a belief that one only gains political obligations, such as the obligation to vote or become active in political processes, after actively consenting to join a political system. All of Locke's beliefs regarding the obligations of citizens were based on rationality.

Kant's beliefs on the obligations of citizens were similar to Locke's in their basis in rationality, but Kant's moral framework was more in depth. Kant believed that there were two primary types of obligation, including obligations that citizens opt into by being part of a city or township and inherent obligation that cannot be opted out of. This second type of obligation was considered to be a moral duty inherent to all citizens. According to Kant, this moral duty presents all citizens to act in accordance with the way they would expect another reasonable citizen to act.

To summarize, both Locke and Kant believed that citizens possess obligations they can opt into as well as inherent moral obligations that must be followed regardless of membership to any political group. While Locke was more specific as to the nature of these obligations, focusing on the obligation of citizens to follow local rules and ordinances, Kant expanded upon this idea by discussing the general fundamental principles of human obligation, such as acting with goodwill towards other citizens.

Does one road seem to be more appealing than the other in "The Road Not Taken" by Robert Frost?

The grassy path seems to be a more desirable choice.

In the poem, the speaker comes to a place where a road diverges into two paths. He cannot take both, so he stops and looks at the paths. When trying to decide which path to take, they seem similar. Eventually, he decides one of the paths is better because it “wanted wear:”

Then took the other, as just as fair, 

And having perhaps the better claim, 

Because it was grassy and wanted wear; 

Though as for that the passing there 

Had worn them really about the same.

Both paths are covered in leaves. In this way, they again seem very similar. It is really a matter of perception and degree that the speaker seems to think one of them is “less traveled by” at that particular time. He decides to take that one. 

I shall be telling this with a sigh 

Somewhere ages and ages hence: 

Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— 

I took the one less traveled by, 

And that has made all the difference. 

Apparently, this really was the more desirable road. It made a — presumably positive — difference in the speaker’s life. If you look at the poem as a metaphor for life, it seems the speaker came to a point when he had to make a choice between doing what others had done or branching out on his own. He chose to do something unique and different, and he later felt this was a good decision.

The speaker's point is that he made a choice, and he cannot return to the point in his life where he made that choice. We always have to decide what we will do, and this will affect how the rest of our lives turn out.

What are some of Harold Krebs's fears?

Harold Krebs is the main character in Ernest Hemingway's short story "Soldier's Home." Harold is a World War I veteran who has returned to his hometown in Oklahoma. He had served as a Marine in several of the most important battles which ultimately decided the war. Harold seems to most fear a complicated interpersonal relationship, either with anyone in his family or with a potential girlfriend. He claims he wants his life to "go smoothly" without consequences.

Apparently, the war has traumatized Harold and, after witnessing the horrors of battle, he seems very much afraid of loving another person. He avoids the girls in the town that he finds attractive but admits an actual relationship with one would not be "worth it." Instead, Harold withdraws from connections with people. When questioned by his sister about whether he loves her and could be her "beau," he is noncommittal. Later, he even admits that he doesn't love his mother when she questions him about his future and what his plans will be. In the end, however, Hemingway suggests that Harold may eventually be able to love again. In his conversation with his sister, she tells him that he doesn't love her if he won't come to her indoor baseball game. After his confrontation with his mother, Harold admits that he cannot live without "consequences" and he says he will indeed go to watch Helen play baseball:

He wanted his life to go smoothly. It had just gotten going that way. Well, that was all over now, anyway. He would go over to the schoolyard and watch Helen play indoor baseball.  

In Bernard Schlink's The Reader, what are examples of the past shaping the present?

In The Reader, past events shape Michael's and Hanna's emotional landscape. 

When Michael and Hanna were involved with one another, a lack of emotional commitment led to their undoing. Neither Hanna or Michael generated a healthy and open emotional commitment. Issues of fear, sex, violence, dependence, education, and age were just a few that plagued their relationship.  Their lack of emotional honesty prevented these issues from being properly addressed, and clouded their time together. Being unable to sort out these issues not only led to their undoing, but set the stage for their future interactions.

A lack of emotional commitment shaped the next time their paths crossed. When Michael is in the courtroom, an emotional commitment in the form of telling the truth about Hanna would have delivered her from an unjust verdict.  Michael retreats into metaphysical rationalization as opposed to fully committing to an emotional connection to another human being.  Hanna is also emotionally unable to fully commit to the truth.  Rather than accept her illiteracy in public, she accepts blame for something she did not do.  The courtroom shows the lack of openness that defined the earlier part of their relationship. Even though they are no longer together, Michael and Hanna are still living lives filled with evasion of emotional truth.  

While Hanna is in jail, a lack of emotional connection continues to shape their relationship. Michael can commit to reciting books on tape for Hanna.  He can be there for her through recorded tape.  However, he cannot commit to her rehabilitation process, as he is unable to write personalized letters to her.  The emotional distance that defined their earlier relationship shapes this phase of their time. Michael runs away from the complexity of emotions. Even though so many years have passed, he cannot bring himself to embrace emotional intimacy.  He won't even admit to having a deep relationship with her.  When the warden asks Michael why he did not respond to Hanna's repeated pleas, he can only shrug his shoulders. The lack of emotional commitment that defined Hanna's and Michael's past shapes their present and future.

England was a country struggling through a turbulent time period when Hamlet was written. What advice do you think Shakespeare is giving to his...

The exact year that William Shakespeare wrote Hamlet is unknown, but scholars place it sometime between 1599 and 1601.  In the years 1594 to 1603, England was enmeshed in the Nine Years' War, a military campaign to enforce English rule in Ireland. To be concise, England wanted to increase its control over a small area to encompass the whole island.  It was the largest conflict England was involved in during the Elizabethan era.

In Hamlet, a similar situation exists as Denmark and Norway are fighting over territory; specifically, a piece of land Denmark has won but Norway wanted to win back.  

Hamlet observes young Fortinbras' ability to lead men to their deaths over a disputed piece of land and contrasts it with his own reluctance to act in avenging his father.

It may be that the loyalty that Fortinbras' troops displayed was meant to observe and inspire the continued loyalty of English soldiers over controlling a piece of land and build, or at least maintain, public support for the Nine Years' War's aim of taking over Ireland. 

Is the following statement true: If no presidential candidate secures the 270 electoral votes, do the large states have an advantage when the...

At first glance, this would seem like a true question.  Since the larger states have more representation in the House of Representatives, it would seem they have an advantage.  California, for instance, has 53 representatives and Texas has 36.  Compare this with the smaller states of Vermont, Montana, and the Dakotas that have one member each and you can see why the bigger states would seem to have a larger voice in this process.  The reason why this question is false, however, is established in the 12th Amendment:

and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote;

As you can see by the wording of this, while representatives are responsible for choosing the president, they do so with only one vote per state.  For this reason, the larger states do not have an advantage in this process.

In To Kill A Mockingbird, what is Scout's main internal conflict and how is it resolved?

Scout has several internal conflicts throughout the novel.  One that is central and appears throughout much of the novel is her reaction to those who criticize her father.

When Atticus takes the Tom Robinson case, he earns the disapproval of many Maycomb citizens.  The case is controversial, and many white people in Maycomb already harbor negative feelings toward blacks.

Cecil Jacobs is the first one to say anything.  He speaks of Atticus in an insulting way and uses the n-word to describe Tom Robinson.  Scout is appalled and becomes angry.  Later, Scout's cousin Francis says something similar.  Both times, Scout tries to fight the boys who insult her father.

Atticus patiently explains to Scout that she needs to walk in someone else's shoes.  She needs to have empathy and compassion for others.  Gradually, Scout's heart changes.  Scout begins to see that many people in Maycomb are ignorant.  They think badly about the black residents of Maycomb because their parents had taught them so.  They do not have empathy.  When Scout frets about the reactions of people in town, Atticus reassures her:

"Scout," said Atticus, "when summer comes you'll have to keep your head about far worse things… it's not fair for you and Jem, I know that, but sometimes we have to make the best of things, and the way we conduct ourselves when the chips are down—well, all I can say is, when you and Jem are grown, maybe you'll look back on this with some compassion and some feeling that I didn’t let you down.  This case, Tom Robinson’s case, is something that goes to the essence of a man's conscience—Scout, I couldn't go to church and worship God if I didn't try to help that man" (To Kill a Mockingbird, Chapter 11).

Atticus knows that many people in town disapproval of his defense of Tom.  He knows that temporary ridicule is worth it for doing the right thing.   Scout slowly begins to have more empathy.  She also develops more of an understanding of the black community in Maycomb.  She gets to know Calpurnia more than ever before, and she and Jem sit up in the balcony during the trial.  The resolution is when Scout comes to accept that it does not matter what everyone else says.  It is better to do the right thing than to appear proper around town.

How do I write an autobiography for my English homework?

An autobiography is your life story.  English teachers usually assign an autobiographical incident, which is an important event from your life and not your entire life story.  You might want to clarify the instructions with your teacher.

If you really are writing about your entire life, a good place to begin is your birth.  Describe your family background and how you came into the world.  Where was your family?  What siblings did you have and how old were they?  What did your parents do for a living?  Any interesting or important information about your birth is good to include.

From then, focus on interesting and significant events from your life that you remember.  You can ask family members for ideas.  Focus on a few specific memorable things, like times you might have moved, important events in your life, accomplishments, or anything that stands out.  Do not focus too much on the mundane.  Use broad strokes.

For an autobiographical incident, you should choose an event that you remember that is important to who you are.  It could be something that you did or something that happened to you.  Sometimes people choose births of siblings, family vacations, traumatic incidents, or other important events.  The idea is to focus tightly on one specific event in your life.

When writing an autobiographical incident, give background of who you are at the time.  Explain when it happened, and think like a reporter.  Who was involved?  Why did it happen?  How did it affect you?  Remember that you are writing a story.  It is good to include dialogue.  It does not have to be word for word exactly what people said.  If you remember the gist of it, or can imagine how the conversation might have gone, that will be enough.  Dialogue spices up the writing and makes it seem more like a story.

Which contributed more to the fall of the Orleanist monarch in 1848: an insensitive home policy or a weak foreign policy?

Louis Philippe I, leader of the Orleanist party, was the King of France from 1830 to 1848. He was overthrown during the French Revolution of 1848, largely in reaction to his insensitive home policy. When Charles X, a conservative, was overthrown in 1830, Louis Philippe became a popular choice for king, as he was seen as a representative of the petite bourgeoisie. However, it quickly became apparent that he was conservative and favored the wealthy bourgeoisie. As a result, the income gap between the wealthy and the rest of the population increased, and there were workers' strikes and an attempt on his life in 1835 in reaction to his policies. Most of the electorate was disenfranchised during his reign, and only landowners, representing about 1% of the population, were allowed to vote. Discontent grew among the petite bourgeoisie and working class, particularly as the government was accused of corruption. In foreign policy, Louis Philippe supported the development of French colonies such as Algeria and formed an alliance with Britain. His overthrow in 1848 was largely in reaction to his domestic policies. 

Why does the Radley place fascinate Scout, Jem and Dill?

The Radley place fascinates Dill and the Finch children because of the mystery that surrounds it.

After Dill Harris arrives in Maycomb,

[T]he Radley place fascinated Dill....In spite of our warnings and explanations it drew him as the moon draws water, but drew him no nearer than the light-pole on the corner....(Ch.1)

The house resembles an old haunted house: It is darkened to a dull grey; on the long unpainted exterior of the house, there are dilapidated shutters that "drooped over the eaves of the veranda." (Ch.1) Large oak trees darken much of the yard in which no grass grows. The broken remains of a picket fence "drunkenly guarded the front yard" (Ch.1) where only wild, tough grass and "rabbit-tobacco" grow wild. Rumors of the house's being occupied by "a malevolent phantom" abound.
Other rumors that circulate through Maycomb suggest that this phantom goes out on moonless nights and peers into people's windows. If this "haint" breathes on any azalea bushes at night, they are wilted the next day. When chickens or pets are found injured, it is because the phantom has been responsible, even though there is proof that a man called Crazy Addie was the culprit.

In addition, there is suspicion of what goes on in the Radley house because the occupants do not come outside; they do not go to church, and they never talk with any neighbors. Rumor also has it that Boo once stabbed his father in the leg with a scissors when he was thirty-three years old.
Thus, it is because of all this mystery that Dill wishes to make contact with Boo Radley, who seems to be insane. With such intense curiosity assisted by his creative imagination, Dill draws Jem and Scout into engaging in the adventure of learning more about the phantom who dwells inside the dark, sequestered house in their neighborhood.

In the book 1984, Winston and Julia are at Victory Square and watch a convoy of trucks passing. What is their primary cargo?

What Julia and Winston and the crowds packed into Victory Square see passing by in the trucks are prisoners of war captured by Oceania in a recent battle. As the novel puts it,

In the trucks little yellow men in shabby greenish uniforms were squatting, jammed close together. Their sad, Mongolian faces gazed out over the sides of the trucks utterly incurious. Occasionally when a truck jolted there was a clank-clank of metal: all the prisoners were wearing leg-irons...

As we know from the novel, Oceania is perpetually at war with one of the two other superpowers, Eurasia or Eastasia. Since both these other superpowers seem to be Asian, the ethnicity of the prisoners gives no clue as to what country Oceania is currently fighting with--and it doesn't really matter, because the country changes all the time, and whichever country it currently is, the regime insists that country has always been the enemy. But through much of the first part of the novel, Oceania is at war with Eurasia.

We can surmise that these prisoners will be executed because while rewriting a news story, Winston creates a Comrade Ogilvy who creates a hand grenade that kills 31 Eurasian prisoners in one burst. 

How can I write an essay on "Mending Wall" by Robert Frost?

In order to write an essay about "Mending Wall," you need to ask yourself what it is that you would like the reader to take away about this poem after reading your essay.  This poem has a great deal to say about friendship and walls, doesn't it?  One question to explore is why the narrator does not like walls. Another is why his neighbor does like the wall. You might write an essay contrasting the two neighbors in the poem, who clearly see life very differently.  

Whatever it is that you want your reader to take away is your thesis, your main idea, and that thesis must be supported by the text of the poem.  So, for example, if you were to write an essay on why the narrator doesn't like the wall, you might use the very first verse of the poem,

Something there is that doesn't love a wall,

That sends the frozen-ground-swell under it, 

And spills the upper boulders in the sun;

And makes gaps even two can pass abreast (Frost lines 1-4)

You could argue that the narrator does not like the wall because nature is against it, always trying to tear it down.  That is using the text to support your thesis.

As you decide upon a thesis, you will need to incorporate it into a thesis statement, one sentence that states your main idea and the points you will discuss to support that idea.  So, for example, if I were writing an essay about why the narrator does not like the wall, I could have this as a thesis statement:

The narrator in "Mending Wall" shows that he does not appreciate his wall because it is against nature, it serves no purpose, and it does not make him and his fellow wall-mender good neighbors. 

That states a thesis, the narrator's attitude toward the wall and three aspects of the poem that provide the reasons.  Your thesis statement should be the very last sentence in your introduction.

For an essay in which you have three supporting points in your thesis statement, assuming that you do have three points, you will write a five-paragraph essay. The first paragraph will introduce the essay, including the name of the poem and its author, as well as your thesis statement.  The next three paragraphs will be body paragraphs, each one discussing a point from the thesis statement, in the same order in which you "list" those points in the thesis statement. Give each of these a good topic sentence to let the reader know which point you are developing. Finally, you will have a fifth paragraph that will be your conclusion. In a conclusion, we remind the reader what the main idea is and review the points made in the body paragraphs. 

Could someone please help me with a summary of the book Pyramid Response to Intervention by Buffum, Mattos, and Weber? I also need a personal...

Beginning the book's discussion with the Response to Intervention (RTI) approach, Pyramid Response to Intervention explains that RTI shifts the burden of educating students who struggle to learn from Special Education professionals to the entire collective of the professional learning community (PLC). A distinctive feature of the Pyramid Model of RTI is its unified system that makes assessment of students' learning "universal, ongoing, and formative" and in which "fidelity" to intention and design must occur during implementation of the three tier pyramid of intervention (POI) strategies, whether implemented at the elementary, middle, or high school levels.

First tier strategies--at all three school levels--are implemented through core curriculum with embedded universal "ongoing monitoring," with "universal" meaning for all students. Second tier strategies are aimed at students whose monitoring identifies them as "not learning"; these strategies are "immediate and powerful interventions systematically applied and monitored" in the student's learning environment in which parents play a significant role. Third tier strategies consist of "intensive interventions focused on closing the gap" between the student's potential and actual learning. As the pyramid of RTI strategies goes upward, interventions intensify and the number of students needing intervention decreases.

The authors of Pyramid Response to Intervention: RTI, Professional Learning Communities, and How to Respond When Kids Don't Learn are experts in education: Austin Buffum Ed.D., a retired senior Superintendent of Orange County, CA; Mike Mattos M.S., a principal in Tustin, CA; Chris Weber Ed.D., teacher and District Administrator in Dana Point, CA. The purpose of the book written by these experts is explained in the Forward by Richard DuFour, teacher, author, and consultant. Since the purpose of an instructional book like this gives foundation to its contents, it is useful to include with the general summary above a condensed statement of the authors' purpose.

The legislated RTI initiative, when incorporated into schools' "existing, well-defined improvement processes," which are used "as a catalyst for enhancing both student and adult learning" through educators' collaborative work, provides another path for educators to "acknowledge and embrace a shared purpose of helping all students learn at high levels," and it fosters another avenue for educators to "take collective responsibility for achieving that shared purpose" of excellence in learning for all students. The conceptual difficulty to be overcome is that the work of the educator is often perceived as being done "in isolation," whereas RTI is a function of collaborative, collective effort among the professional learning community (PLC).

Part of the goal inherent in the implementation of RTI is to develop a collaborative, collective conceptualization of a teacher's role where such a conception doesn't yet exist. Once that is in place, RTI will "reinforce and strengthen the assumptions, commitments, and practices" that exist, and educators will work together to implement, assess, and improve the [RTI] model." Written as it is by educators who are leaders of schools where collaborative frameworks were already in place, Pyramid Response to Intervention models how to incorporate RTI into a school's existing PLC.

`int sqrt(1 + x^2) / x dx` Evaluate the integral

`intsqrt(1+x^2)/xdx`

Let's evaluate using the trigonometric substitution,

Let `x=tan(theta)`

`dx=sec^2(theta)d theta`

`=intsqrt(1+tan^2(theta))/(tan(theta))*sec^2(theta) d theta`

Now use the identity: `1+tan^2(x)=sec^2(x)`

`=intsqrt(sec^2(theta))/tan(theta)*sec^2(theta)d theta`

`=intsec(theta)/tan(theta)*sec^2(theta)d theta`

`=int(sec(theta)(1+tan^2(theta)))/tan(theta) d theta`

`=int((sec(theta))/tan(theta)+(sec(theta)tan^2(theta))/tan(theta))d theta`

`=intsec(theta)/tan(theta)d theta+intsec(theta)tan(theta)d theta` 

`=int(1/cos(theta))*(1/(sin(theta)/cos(theta)))d theta+intsec(theta)tan(theta)d theta`

`=int1/sin(theta) d theta+intsec(theta)tan(theta)d theta`

`=intcsc(theta)d theta+intsec(theta)tan(theta)d theta`

Now using the standard integrals,

`intcsc(x)dx=ln|csc(x)-cot(x)`

`intsec(x)tan(x)dx=sec(x)`

`=ln|csc(theta)-cot(theta)|+sec(theta)`

Now substitute back `x=tan(theta)`

`=>cot(theta)=1/tan(theta)=1/x`

`1+tan^2(theta)=sec^2(theta)`

`=>1+x^2=sec^2(theta)`

`=>sec(theta)=sqrt(1+x^2)`

`1+cot^2(theta)=csc^2(theta)`

`=>1+(1/x)^2=csc^2(theta)`

`csc(theta)=sqrt(1+x^2)/x` 

`:.intsqrt(1+x^2)/xdx=ln|sqrt(1+x^2)/x-1/x|+sqrt(1+x^2)+C` ,C is a constant

How does Dickens use setting to convey the mood right at the opening of Great Expectations?

Charles Dickens employs pathetic fallacy in the opening chapter in order to create the mood of loneliness, dismay, unrest, and trepidation.

Everything is grey: the tombstone, the sky, the changing weather--even Pip's changing mood is affected by his encounter with the coarse convict all in grey. This grim setting serves to leave a powerful impression upon Pip, especially as it is accompanied by this "fearful man all in coarse grey" who has an iron on his leg and an old rag upon his head.

A man who had been soaked in water, and smothered in mud, and lamed by stones, and cut by flints, and...torn by briars; who limped and shivered, and glared and growled....

This man is elemental himself, and Pip feels overpowered by the storm of his presence. In fact, Pip is profoundly affected by his encounter with the convict, so much so that it looms over him throughout his life. For, he is often fearful that Magwitch may seek him in London and cause him distress and great embarrassment. Always there is a certain unrest--a storm brewing--in Pip as he is fearful of any re-encounter with the old convict. 

What is the climax of Games at Twilight by Anita Desai? What is the theme? What is the denouement?

The climax of "Games at Twilight" occurs when Ravi runs out of his hiding spot and shouts "den" to claim his victory.  

The denouement, or falling action, of the story is when the kids do not give Ravi credit for winning the game.  They completely forgot about Ravi and moved on to playing another game.  Ravi is near complete devastation, and the falling action moves toward the story's final conclusion.  That conclusion is Ravi's realization of just how insignificant he still is.  

He lay down full length on the damp grass, crushing his face into it, no longer crying, silenced by a terrible sense of his insignificance.

That realization ties in with a theme of the story.  The theme would be the alienation of the individual.  Ravi feels alone and inferior throughout most of the story.  Ravi is not a leader, and he feels inferior against the bully Raghu. Ravi believes that winning the game of hide-and-seek will help earn him recognition and popularity.  

To defeat Raghu—that hirsute, hoarse-voiced football champion—and to be the winner in a circle of older, bigger, luckier children—that would be thrilling beyond imagination. He hugged his knees together and smiled to himself almost shyly at the thought of so much victory, such laurels.

Unfortunately, nobody believes that Ravi won the game, and he is relegated to being just as insignificant and alone as he was before. 

Explain the roles and actions of different levels of government in relation to trade.

I am assuming that your question is about United States government and relates to international trade, not trade within the United States.  The only level of government that has control over the United States trade with foreign nations is the federal government, as mandated by the Constitution. Other levels of government have no power at all. 

Article I, Section 8 states that Congress regulates commerce with other countries.  There are a few different options that can be exercised in foreign trade.  One is to impose a tariff on in-coming goods, which makes them more expensive for Americans to buy, thus encouraging people to buy American-made goods instead.  This runs the risk of other nations doing the same, which means that fewer people will buy American-made goods. Another option is to have no tariff at all, which is pure "free trade," so that goods move freely over borders without any taxation.  Finally, an embargo can be imposed, which is generally done for political reasons, although one could certainly be imposed for a situation in which unsafe products from other countries were being sold.  We have had an embargo against Cuban products for a very long time. And while no one discusses this, I am sure that we are not supposed to be purchasing any goods from North Korea.

State and local governments are not permitted to enter into trade agreements with foreign countries, and it is easy to see why.  It would destroy the cohesion of the country.  If New York had a trade agreement with France, and Pennsylvania imposed tariffs upon French goods, it would be a disaster.  French goods would be routinely smuggled from New York to Pennsylvania. And that is just one small example.  To be a nation, there must be one cohesive policy that covers all the states. 

None of this stops anyone in any state from selling to or buying from other countries. It simply means that whatever rules apply to the situation, they have been decided upon by Congress, and they apply to all the states.

Why would more countries join the communist side if colonialism had continued during the Cold War?

First, for oppressed people, Communism sounds rather appealing.  The people get rid of their upper-class oppressors, and many in the developing world felt this way towards the Western colonial powers.  However, these people were not true Marxists.  The Soviet Union, in order to gain support overseas, sent aid and military advisers to countries that they thought would be friendly to them.  North Vietnam asked for and received lots of support from the Soviet Union during the Vietnam War--Hanoi's air defense system was largely funded by Moscow.  Of course, the developing world was often able to play the rival superpowers off each other.  The United States often had to match and exceed the aid package given by the Soviet Union in order to make sure that its potential client states stayed in the Western camp.  

You mention colonialism continuing after the Cold War, and outside of monetary and ideological reasons, this would have been very difficult to continue in the traditional sense anyway.  When you look at the traditional colonial powers of Europe, France and Britain, they payed a very heavy price in terms of blood and treasure during WWII.  For a time during the war, France lost its colonial possessions to the Axis powers.  WWII was the final death blow against colonialism for the Western world and the end of this time period began the rush to create client states by the two remaining superpowers, America and the Soviet Union.  

What do you think "The Gift of the Magi," written a century ago, has to say about our consumer society today?

I would argue that “The Gift of the Magi,” by O. Henry, can suggest to us that our consumer society is too focused on material things. It suggests that we should be less materialistic and more interested in our human relationships.

In this story, Della and Jim have very little money. They are so poor that they cannot afford to buy one another Christmas presents. However, each wants the other to have something material. Jim wants Della to have the combs for her hair while she wants him to have a fob for his beloved watch. Jim sells his watch to get the combs while Della sells her hair to get the fob. Neither of them, therefore, ends up able to use what the other gives them. Even so, they are very happy because they realize how much they love one another and how much more important their love is than their material possessions.

We can say that this story is telling us that we are too materialistic. We want all sorts of material things. We care more, arguably, about these material goods than we care about the people around us. “The Gift of the Magi” can suggest to us that we in modern society should change our priorities. It can suggest that we should be like Jim and Della after they exchange their presents. We should realize that the relationships we have with other people are much more important than any of the material goods we are so eager to acquire.

Regarding "The Ransom of Red Chief," are Sam and Bill usually successful in their schemes?

This is a perceptive question? Although "The Ransom of Red Chief" is presented as a funny tale, the moral of the story is clear: Crime does not pay. O. Henry sincerely believed that. He had spent about three years in state prison for embezzlement and never got over the guilt and shame. He wrote under an assumed name and dreaded having his past catch up with him. 

Sam and Bill appear to be middle-aged men who have been trying to make a lot of money through crooked schemes, such as the one Sam mentions at the beginning of "The Ransom of Red Chief." 

Bill and me had a joint capital of about six hundred dollars, and we needed just two thousand dollars more to pull off a fraudulent town-lot scheme in Western Illinois with. 

O. Henry probably has Sam refer to the "fraudulent town-lot scheme" in order to show that these two men are career criminals. After all these years, Sam and Bill only have a joint capital of about six hundred dollars--and ultimately they are going to have to pay Ebenezer Dorset $250 of that capital to take their "victim" off their hands. Just the fact that they have so little money at their ages should prove that they are not usually successful in most of their schemes.

Their latest scheme to kidnap a little boy for ransom may be intended as an illustration of the fact that these two clowns are incompetent. They start off with high hopes and end up victimized by their intended victims. They can't even handle a little boy. Their latest caper is just one disaster in a series that leaves them, in middle age, with a net balance of $350. Their "fraudulent town-lot scheme in Western Illinois" will never come off because they needed $1400 before the kidnapping and now they need $1650. Even if Ebenezer Dorset had paid them the $1500 they demanded, they still would have had to add most of their $600 to finance that town-lot scheme.

What were the research goals and ethical issues with the Milgrim Obedience study?

The primary goal of the Milgram Experiment was to determine the level of conflict between obedience to authority and matters of conscience. Milgram questioned the motivations of the accused in the Nuremberg trials, most of whom claimed that they acted against their own consciences in order to obey authority. The Milgram experiments began one year after the trial of an infamous Nazi soldier who cited similar justification for his actions.

Milgram sought to determine whether German soldiers in World War II were more obedient to authority than the average American would be under similar circumstances. To determine this, he selected male college participants at Yale University.

The chief ethical issue with the series of experiments conducted by Milgram and his colleagues was that the "teachers," or participants who had been given the role of authority figures in the study, believed they were causing real harm to the "learners," who were really Milgram's confederates. Although the learners were not actually harmed, the experiments were set up so the teachers believed they were delivering increasingly painful electrical shocks to the learners.

Critics have argued that Milgram's attempts to understand how far people would go to obey instruction even if it meant harming another person were ethically irresponsible. The conclusion of the study showed that most people would be willing to cause harm to another person if it meant obeying authority. Other ethical issues include the use of deception, exposing participants to stressful situations that may have caused psychological harm, and a study setup that did not make the right to withdraw obvious. One of the hallmarks of an ethical study is that participants are free to withdraw at any point, but the Milgram Experiment relied upon participants feeling pressured to remain in the study. Nonetheless, Milgram argued that his experiment was ethical and the option to withdraw was present because 35 percent of his participants chose to leave.

What were Franklin D. Roosevelt's long term and short term effects?

President Franklin D. Roosevelt had two main short-term effects on the United States.  Those effects were 1) that he helped get the country out of the Great Depression and 2) that he led the United States through the bulk of its involvement in WWII.  In the long term, FDR’s main impact has been to vastly increase the role of the federal government in Americans’ everyday lives.

When FDR took office, the US was mired in the Great Depression.  The economy was in terrible shape.  People were afraid and desperate.  Roosevelt came into office and proposed a series of programs that we now call the New Deal.  These programs gave people hope that there was a way out of the Depression.  Even though the New Deal did not actually end the Depression (WWII did that), most historians would say that it helped to improve the US economy so that things were not as bad between 1933 and 1940 as they had been between 1929 and 1933.  Thus, FDR’s first short term effect was that he helped improve the US economy during the Great Depression and eventually helped the country’s economy return to health.

FDR was then faced with the greatest foreign war in American history.  His second important short-term effect was to lead the US through this war.  He pushed the country to prepare for war even when most people wanted to continue the policy of isolationism.  He formed a good working relationship with Winston Churchill, thus helping to keep the Allies unified.  This unity helped them win the war.  He made good strategic decisions about what the US should and should not try to do at various points throughout the war.  In these ways, he was largely responsible for leading the US to victory in WWII.

In the long term, FDR’s major impact has been on the relationship between government and our society.  Before FDR, the government had little involvement in the lives of ordinary people.  With the New Deal, Roosevelt changed that.  Since the New Deal, the government has gotten to be more and more involved in everything.  It tries to provide more things (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps) than it used to.  It regulates practically every aspect of the economy.  The reach of the government has extended far beyond what most people would have imagined when FDR entered office.  While FDR did not do all of this himself, his New Deal set us on this road.  This is his major long-term effect on the US.

In The Witch of Blackbird Pond, how many meetings did Kit Tyler miss?

Kit Tyler does not miss any formal prayer meetings under the strict surveillance of her pious Uncle Matthew; however, she does miss a Thursday Lecture, which is the day that people are publicly punished in Wethersfield. Kit is terrified of seeing what will happen to Nat, who is being punished for illuminating jack-o-lanterns in the house of William Ashby.

An hour before the meeting is due to start, Kit sneaks out alone and goes to see Nat, who is locked up in the stocks with some of his fellow sailors. Kit attempts to comfort Nat and offers to bring him food, but Nat is too proud for that and says, 'You can stop trying to be a lady of mercy. 'Twas well worth it. I'd gladly sit here another five hours for a sight of Sir William's face that evening." Unimpressed by this childish display of bravado, Kit leaves the square with "[h]ead held high," trying "to keep a ladylike pace." Embarrassed that her very public "foolish concern" might be the subject of the town gossip, Kit wanders to the meeting house, where she sees the formal notice of Nat's punishment: he must pay a fine of forty shillings, remain in the stocks "from one hour before the Lecture till one hour after," and must never return to Wethersfield "on certainty of thirty lashes at the whipping post." 

Kit decides right then and there that she will not go into the Meeting House to hear Nat's sentence read to the entire town since "[s]he could not bear to sit there and hear that sentence read aloud," or "face the family, or the whispering and staring that would turn her own family pew into a pillory." This is, as the book says, "the first time since she had come to Wethersfield in the spring that she had dared to miss a Thursday Lecture."

What does Buck find when he returns to camp after killing the moose? Why do the Yeehats consider Buck an Evil Spirit?

In Jack London's The Call of the Wild, Buck returns from his moose hunt to find his beloved master, John Thornton, and everyone else, including his dog friends,  dead. They had been killed by the Yeehats, some of whom are still there. An enraged Buck goes after them, ripping out throats and killing the Yeehats one by one. Some manage to get away and live to tell the story of how this "devil dog" took revenge on them. After this, Buck becomes a legend as an "evil spirit"--one for whom the Yeehats now have great respect and admiration. The Yeehats also fear Buck because they know he does not fear them. Buck goes on to become the leader of a wolf pack, and over time, the Yeehats begin to notice young wolves who resemble Buck.

By what factor does the kinetic energy of a car change, if an increase in speed doubles the momentum of the car?

The kinetic energy and momentum of a body are given as:

Kinetic energy or K.E. = 1/2 mv^2

and momentum, P = m x v

where, m is the mass of the body and v is its velocity.

Let us say the car has a mass of 'm' and a velocity of 'v' initially.

If due to speed change, the momentum is twice the original value, then

P' = m x v' = 2 P = 2 m x v

or, v' = 2 v

Note that mass of the car remains the same and hence only the velocity is double the original value.

The new kinetic energy will be:

K.E.' = 1/2 m v'^2 = 1/2 m (2v)^2 = 4 [ 1/2 mv^2] = 4 K.E.

The new kinetic energy is thus 4 times the original kinetic energy. 

Hope this helps. 

Was the American Revolution the first of its kind? Did other countries engage in similar rebellions before the American colonies did?

The American Revolution was one of the few early successful revolts for independence against a European empire, but it was not the first. In the Philippines, for example, rebellions against Spanish presence began shortly after the establishment of the Spanish colonial government in 1521; the First Carib War, a revolt by the indigenous people of St. Vincent and British colonial agents, occurred in 1769, a decade before the American Revolution began. However, rebellions against European imperialism prior to the American Revolution failed to gain independence for the colonized states, unlike the U.S. Additionally, many of these attempts at revolt were by indigenous people resisting the colonization of their land, while the American revolutionaries were colonists who wanted to form an autonomous independent state from the former colonies. The American revolution was inspired largely by Enlightenment ideologies of liberty and democracy, rather than previous revolutions, and it was the first of the 18th century Atlantic Revolutions along with the French, Haitian, and Batavian Revolutions.

After reading "The Ones Who Walk Away From Omelas," discuss the people who walk away in terms of who they are, why the leave, and where they go.

The people who leave Omelas are citizens of the town who cannot accept that their happiness is based on the child's suffering.  

The people who leave Omleas are regular townspeople. They range from being "one of the adolescent girls or boys" to "a man or woman much older." They have seen the child whose suffering is the reason behind their happiness:

They know that if the wretched one were not there sniveling in the dark, the other one, the flute-player, could make no joyful music as the young riders line up in their beauty for the race in the sunlight of the first morning of summer.

The difference between these people and those who stay is that what they have seen has left a mark that cannot be washed away.

The narrator says these people simply leave. They have left because they know the truth about living in Omelas. They make no attempt to retrieve the child or fight for the child's rights.  Rather, the narrator says they simply "go out into the street, and walk down the street alone."  They leave the city, walking to an unknown place that is "ahead in the darkness and they do not come back."  Their destination is unclear.  However, the ones who walk away know where they are going, even if the narrator and us do not.

How does Reverend Hale change throughout the play?

At the beginning of the play, Reverend Hale comes to Salem with a very high opinion of himself and his education.  He believes that he knows the way to root out Satan and banish him from the village, that he can identify witches beyond the shadow of a doubt and compel them to return to the Lord.  However, over the course of the play, his confidence begins to wane -- especially once Elizabeth Proctor and Rebecca Nurse are accused and convicted -- until he eventually quits the court at the end of Act Three. 

He returns, in Act Four, a changed man.  He says, "I came into this village like a bridegroom to his beloved, bearing gifts of high religion; the very crowns of holy law I brought, and what I touched with my bright confidence, it died; and where I turned the eye of my great faith, blood flowed up."  He now counsels the convicted to lie to the court and confess to witchcraft in order to save their own lives because "life is God's most precious gift; no principle, however, glorious, may justify the taking of it."  He sees life as being more important than truth now, and he recognizes the the corruption of the court that he once sought to uphold and justify.

To what extent did the Cariboo Gold Rush positively and negatively impact the development of British Columbia?

The Cariboo Gold Rush started in what is now British Columbia in the 1860s (though gold was first discovered in 1858). This gold rush followed the earlier gold rush in the Fraser Canyon of 1858. The gold rush resulted in the development of several towns, such as Barkerville, which was situated near many of the Cariboo mining camps. The gold rush was positive in that it resulted in the development of local infrastructure such as the Cariboo Wagon Road built by the Royal Engineers. This road provided the Canadian government with access to the gold fields so that wealth was kept in Canada rather than being transported to the United States. However, the negative part of the development stemming from the gold rush was that the expense of building the road, given the vast engineering challenges involved, resulted in the near bankruptcy of the Mainland Colony. As a result, the Mainland Colony was forced to join the Island Colony to form the Colony of British Columbia in 1866. 

Why shouldn't have Brutus killed Julius Caesar?

Brutus’s assassination of Julius Caesar was motivated by patriotism. He viewed Caesar as a threat to the republic. If Caesar had lived, Brutus feared (prodded by Cassius) that Caesar would become king, instigating a monarchical system that the Roman Republic had already rejected almost five hundred years previously.

Yet it was not Caesar that Brutus should have feared. It was the Roman people themselves, who were willing to make Caesar king. Their hero-worship of Caesar made them entertain the idea of discarding their freedom and their self-government in favor of this man who had done such great things. If it were not Caesar, they would have sought someone else, as indeed they did in allowing Octavius (Caesar Augustus) to become emperor, thus staring the Roman Empire that lasted another five hundred years. Against the people at large, Brutus had little chance of changing their minds. But not no chance. He was viewed as an influential speaker and could have potentially swayed the masses. Indeed, he tried this after Caesar’s death but Marc Antony came along and persuaded the people to oppose Brutus instead.

Is Alcott mentioned in Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird?

By Alcott, you may mean to speak of the author Louisa May Alcott, an author of the 1800s famous for writing novels that appeal to girls such as Little Women, Little Men, and Jo's Boys. While neither the name Alcott nor her works are mentioned or alluded to in To Kill a Mockingbird, author Harper Lee does make many other literary allusions.

Early in the novel, we learn that when Scout, Jem, and Dill play games, they act out characters and plots they have read in books. Many children's novels popular in that time period are mentioned such as Tarzan and the Apes, "the Rover Boys series," and the "Tom Swift series." With each book they act out, Jem takes the best roles for himself, leaving Scout and Dill to play the inferior roles. For example, Jem plays Tarzan while Scout, followed by Dill when he arrives, plays the ape; Jem plays the brilliant detective Tom Swift while Scout then Dill plays his dumber side kick; and, Dill plays the insecure Mr. Crabtree from the "Rover Boys series" while Jem and Scout take the lead roles. All of these references to popular children's books count as literary allusions.

Aside from literary allusions, Lee also makes several historical allusions in speaking of the South losing the Civil War and the end of slavery. For example, in the very first chapter, Scout the narrator notes that their founding father, Simon Finch, would have been furious with the freedom of the slaves the Civil War brought because it robbed the Finches of their wealth and free labor, leaving the Finches only their land:

Simon would have regarded with impotent fury the disturbance between the North and South, as it left his descendants stripped of everything but their land. (Ch. 1)

This reference to the "disturbance between the North and the South" is an allusion to the Civil War and to the freedom of the slaves, which counts as an historical allusion. Beyond being a famous children's novelist, Louisa May Alcott was also a devoted abolitionist. So, while Alcott is not alluded to in Lee's novel, many of the things she stood for are alluded to.

What were some significant social impacts of World War II?

World War II had some significant social impacts throughout the world. In the United States, women played an important role in the war. During the war, many women went to work in the factories making supplies for the soldiers. Women also served in the military. The role women played during the war showed they were deserving of better treatment in our society. The war also showed that women were capable of doing jobs that went beyond the usual jobs that women had normally done.

African-Americans also played an important role in the war. As a result of their military efforts, African-Americans were proving that they shouldn’t have to face discrimination at home. They were fighting racism at home and abroad. President Roosevelt issued an executive order ending discrimination in hiring workers at federal defense plants. After World War II, our military became integrated.

Throughout the world, people realized the deadly consequences of hateful actions. When people learned the full scope of the Holocaust, many people vowed to never let something like that happen again.

Many Mexicans moved to the United States during World War II. As part of the Bracero Program, they came to work on the farms of California. They helped harvest crops that would provide food for the soldiers.

After the war, new technology became available to people throughout the world. New appliances and television sets became common in the homes of many people. In some European countries, the government mandated vacation time so people would have more free time to spend away from their jobs.

There were several social impacts that occurred as a result of World War II.

What is the connection between the endocrine system and the cardiovascular system?

The cardiovascular and endocrine systems are intimately related, and the endocrine system influences blood pressure, heart rate, and blood sugar levels. Insulin and glucagon, both hormones secreted by the pancreas, respectively increase and decrease the levels of glucose in the blood. This helps to regulate energy levels during and after exercise, eating, and rest. Levels of lipids (fats) are also tightly regulated by hormones in the body.

Glucocorticoids are stress hormones (cortisol is the most well known) that also strongly influence blood pressure and blood sugar. Epinephrine (commonly called adrenaline), a stress hormone that is secreted by the adrenal glands next to the kidneys and that is largely responsible for the "fight or flight" response, also strongly impacts blood pressure and blood sugar.

Because of this relationship, disorders of the endocrine system, such as hyperthyroidism and hypothyroidism (excessive and deficient thyroid activity), diabetes (disordered sensitivity to insulin or poor insulin production), and chronic stress (excess cortisol) can all have very negative effects on blood pressure, free lipids in the arteries (which can cause atherosclerosis), and blood sugar (which can also damage the arteries in excess), and therefore massively impact cardiovascular health.  

How does Romeo act around Benvolio and Mercutio?

When Romeo is around Benvolio and Mercutio, he seems able to be very much himself. In Act 1, Scene 1, Benvolio is able to get Romeo to reveal what has been bothering him — Rosaline, the woman he loves, doesn't return his feelings.  Neither Romeo's parents nor his other friends, according to his father, were able to gain his confidence in this way.

In Act I, Scene 4, when Mercutio is trying to convince Romeo to go to the Capulets' party with them, the two engage in some clever wordplay and witty repartee. Romeo is smart, and his language conveys this to his friends. Romeo is honest, again, about his unwillingness to go to any party right now, and he and Mercutio debate love and what to do about the sadness Romeo feels due to his unrequited love for Rosaline. 

Romeo and his friends are particularly lewd in Act II, Scene 4, just before the nurse arrives, and they make a lot of sexual jokes. Honestly, I think this shows Romeo and his friends act a lot like typical teenage boys. They are fiercely loyal to and honest with one another, but they also joke around.

In Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, what does it mean when it says on page 38, "the poison working up his wrists and into his elbows"? What is the...

In the text I have, this passage falls on page 41.

"So it was the hand that started it all . . . His hands had been infected, and soon it would be his arms. He could feel the poison working up his wrists and into his elbows and his shoulders, and then the jump-over from shoulder blade to shoulder blade like a spark leaping a gap. His hands were ravenous. And his eyes were beginning to feel hunger, as if they must look at something, anything, everything" (41).

Montag has just returned home from helping to burn down a woman's home. Actually, she ignites the house and herself at the same time, which traumatizes Montag. But before the old woman does that, Montag steals a book from her home and he blames it on his hand. He arrives home in the dark, and like a child who impatiently wants to open his gift, Montag imagines the metaphorical "poison" moving through his veins. This poison could represent the curiosity and desire Montag has to learn about what books have to offer.

The passage also uses the word "hunger" to describe how passionately Montag's eyes want to read. So, the poison could be the "hunger" or desire to do something wrong. However, since reading books is illegal, then this curiosity and desire to read would be like a poison that can infect him with a figurative disease. That disease would then be a deeper knowledge and understanding of the world around him. Montag's society, though, does not want him to understand the world around him; it wants him to remain distracted and have fun.

Was Beowulf a typical epic hero?

Beowulf, the main character of the Old English poem Beowulf, fulfills many, but not quite all, of the usual characteristics of the epic hero.

Most importantly, he exhibits the qualities esteemed by his culture. When Beowulf was composed, England was primarily an Anglo-Saxon area. The Anglo-Saxon culture was significantly influenced by warfare. This warrior-based culture fostered values like courage and loyalty, both traits that Beowulf possessed in abundance.

Epic heroes often battle supernatural enemies, as Beowulf did with Grendel, Grendel's mother, and finally the dragon that terrorized his kingdom.

A long and dangerous voyage is also a hallmark of the epic hero's experience. We don't really see a lot of this in Beowulf, although his journey to and from Hrothgar's kingdom is briefly referred to.

Epic heroes often have a noble birth. While Beowulf is not born to a king, and is therefore not a prince, he is related to the Geat king Higlac. When Higlac dies in battle, Beowulf ascends to the Geat throne.

Some sort of exceptional ability is often attributed to the epic hero. Beowulf is probably the strongest warrior in the world. He can defeat Grendel single-handedly. He kills sea monsters by himself. He even battles a dragon as an old man.

The one characteristic of the epic hero that Beowulf most certainly does not possess is humility. In terms of our modern sensibilities, Beowulf looks like an arrogant braggart as boasts of his many feats of bravery and strength. However, he is telling the truth—he really is capable of doing all the things he says he can do and has done.

Taken as a whole, Beowulf is an epic hero, even if he does not meet all the criteria. Even Odysseus, the star of the Greek epic The Odyssey, was known to blow his horn about his exploits from time to time.

Why does Holling's sister consider herself a flower child?

Holling's sister considers herself a flower child because she believes in peace and is against violence of any sort. For example, Heather is against the Vietnam War. In the novel, she tells her father that fifty thousand flower children protested the war at the Pentagon.

As a bit of background, the flower power movement of the late 1960s rejected traditional American values and demonstrated new attitudes towards drugs, premarital sex, alternative sexualities, and health. Many historians characterize the flower movement as a sort of hippie rebellion. The flower children reveled in a new era of free love, became enchanted with Eastern philosophy and religions, and explored new alternatives to the traditional American diet. Vegetarianism rose in popularity, as did communes, health foods, and peasant clothing. Many women wore flowers in their hair, symbolizing their support for peace, love, and unity.

In the book, Heather closely identifies with this movement. At one point, she paints a bright yellow flower on her cheek to show her support for the movement, which thoroughly horrifies her father. Mr. Hoodhood is adamant that no daughter of his will be known as a flower child. Undaunted, Heather explains,

A flower child is beautiful and doesn't do anything to harm anyone. . . We believe in peace and understanding and freedom. We believe in sharing and helping each other. We're going to change the world.

More than a little irritated, Mr. Hoodhood asserts that "a flower child. . . is a hippie who lives in Greenwich Village in dirty jeans and beads and who can't change a pair of socks." What Mr. Hoodhood doesn't realize is that Heather's support for the flower power movement is her way of rebelling against his hypocrisy and self-absorption. Heather maintains to Holling that, although her attempt at asserting herself fell flat, she is happy she made the effort to defend her individuality.

Explain, using a diagram, what would happen in the market for car tires if at the same time there was an increase in the prices of rubber used in...

In order to make a diagram for this question, refer to the link below.  You will need to have price on the vertical axis and quantity on the horizontal axis.  The demand curve will have a negative slope and the supply curve will have a positive slope.  In the scenario presented in this question, your demand curve will move to the right when the price of cars drops and your supply curve will move to the left when the price of rubber increases.  These two changes will both cause the price of car tires to rise, but we do not know whether the quantity will rise, fall, or remain unchanged.

When the price of rubber rises, the supply of car tires will drop.  This is because rubber is one of the major inputs for car tires.  When the price of an input rises, the supply of the good falls.  This is represented by a movement of the supply curve to the left.  You can see this in the interactive graph in this link.

When the price of cars falls, the demand for car tires will rise.  When the price of cars drops, people will buy more cars.  This will mean more tires are needed and the demand will rise.  This is shown by a movement of the demand curve to the right as shown in the interactive graph in this link.

Both of these factors will cause prices to rise.  However, we do not know what will happen to the quantity.  If the supply decreases much more than the demand increases, quantity will fall.  If the increase in demand is greater than the drop in supply, quantity will rise.  If they are almost equal, the quantity will not change much, if at all.

What is the purpose of the handicaps in Harrison Bergeron?

This is a dystopian future (2081) in which the government has established new laws (211th, 212th, and 213th amendments to the Constitution) to enforce a doctrine of equality. The government has decided that, in order to keep people happy while avoiding any feelings of superiority or inferiority, handicaps will be used to enforce this equality. If someone is a genius, he/she will be given mental handicaps to bring him/her down to a common, median level. If someone is attractive, he will be given cosmetic handicaps to make him less attractive. If someone is a superior athlete, she will be given physical handicaps to bring her down to everyone else's level. 

They were equal every which way. Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else. 

Hazel has average intelligence so she has no handicaps. She is at that median average. George is above average so he has to endure a mental handicap that prevents him from thinking too deeply about anything. He must wear his handicap at all times. 

Their son, Harrison, is supremely gifted. Therefore, he has been given the most debilitating handicaps the Handicapper General can come up with. Harrison is so gifted that he eventually sheds his handicaps. However, he indulges in his self-glorifying moment and is shot by the Handicapper General. The television program is cut out, leaving George and Hazel alone and without the ability to recall what they had just seen. In this story, everyone is equal but it comes at the cost of mental and physical oppression.