2+22

2 + 22 = 24

This question was solved using addition. Addition is the process by which two or more values are combine to find a total amount. In story problems, key words may indicate that addition is required to utilized. Some of these key words include: total, all tougher, join, both, together, sum, plus, increase, and/or add.

Addition is one of four basic operations in mathematics. The other three basic operations of mathematics are subtraction, division, and multiplication.

There is a proper order to follow when given a multi-step mathematic problem that include multiple operations. This order is can be remembered using the acronym PEMDAS. The acronym stands for parenthesis, exponents, multiplication, division, addition, and subtraction. Here, the order of operations is explained in greater detail.

What ingredient in finger nail polish increases durability?

Plasticizers are added to nail polish to increase its durability. Plasticizers are chemicals that make a substance more flexible and, therefore, more durable. The plasticizer found in nail polish is most often composed of camphor, dibutyl phthalate (DBP), trimethyl pentanyl, and/or triphenyl phosphate.

However, as of 2006, the use of dibutyl phthalate (DBP) is less common because some suspect that the chemical is an endocrine disruptor. In fact, the European Union has banned all use of DPB.

Although they do not increase durability, nail polish is composed of three other main ingredients. These ingredients are polymers, pigments, and solvents. Polymers serves as the foundation of nail polish. The polymers in nail polish make the polish hard, shiny, and adhesive. The pigments give each polish its unique color. The solvents help the polish spread onto the nail.

What is a summary of the book "The Safety of Objects" by A.M. Homes?

This is a collection of shorter stories written by A. M. Homes that was published in 1990.  In short, it is a collection of stories about the American Dream and the strange events that often surround that idea.

There are three stories:  "Adults Alone," "A Real Doll," and "Looking for Johnny."  The first story, "Adults Alone," is about the sordid activities this particular couple chooses to do together when Grandma takes the kids.  In short, the husband and wife do crack cocaine together, watch (and act upon) porn, and play video games.  In "A Real Doll," we find a more surreal story about a little girl and her Barbie that she plays with.  Here the blond Barbie (a literal "doll") is able to tempt the little girl's teen brother into a strange episode of seduction.  Finally, in "Looking for Johnny," we see a totally different story about a boy who is the victim of a kidnapping.  Eventually, Johnny doesn't conform to the expectations of his kidnapper, so he is promptly returned home. 

In conclusion, these stories all border on existentialism in that they are all (in some way) about some type of perversion that is meant to be bothersome to the reader.  Exposing these dangers of humdrum daily life is Homes's goal as she gives each of her characters a sort of mask to hide behind.

What does Act 1, Scene 3 tell us about the witches' power?

This scene shows us that the witches do have some supernatural power, although we cannot know for certain just how much.  

They tell Macbeth that he will be made the Thane of Cawdor, and this is not technically a prophecy because it has already happened: Duncan told Ross at the end of the prior scene to go and execute the Thane of Cawdor for treason, "And with his former title greet Macbeth" (1.2.76). Macbeth isn't aware that this has happened, however, and so when Ross approaches him to present him with his new title, it seems as though the Weird Sisters have foretold the future. It is possible that when they tell him that he will be king, they aren't prophesying but rather telling him something to manipulate him: they might just want to see what he'll be willing to do in order to make this statement become reality. If so, then they perhaps have no real ability to foretell future events.

However, they do vanish (according to the stage direction just after line 81). Being able to disappear into thin air does seem to indicate that they have some supernatural ability, if not the one they claim to possess. At the beginning of the scene, they discuss a number of things which, if they can really do them, would also indicate their supernatural natures: sailing anywhere in a sieve, torturing a man by preventing him from sleeping for a long period of time, controlling the winds, and so on.

In The Call of the Wild, what is Buck's life like at Judge Miller's place?

Buck lived a pampered life at Judge Miller’s place.

Buck was not always a sled dog.  Before he was kidnapped, he was a pampered house pet.  Judge Miller was wealthy, living on a large farm in Santa Clara, California.  It was warm and sunny, and Buck had extensive grounds to explore.

Buck lived at a big house in the sun-kissed Santa Clara Valley. Judge Miller's place, it was called. It stood back from the road, half-hidden among the trees, through which glimpses could be caught of the wide cool veranda that ran around its four sides.

The land was his domain, and Buck was in charge.  There were other dogs there, but Buck was large and beautiful, and he was everyone’s favorite.  He played with the judge’s kids and lived in the house.  He was Judge Miller's special pet.  The other dogs didn't count.

But Buck was neither house dog nor kennel dog. The whole realm was his. He plunged into the swimming tank or went hunting with the Judge's sons; he escorted Mollie and Alice, the Judge's daughters, on long twilight or early morning rambles; on wintry nights he lay at the Judge's feet before the roaring library fire …

Until Buck was stolen, he never suffered.  He had everything he ever needed, and his will was his command.  He never imagined that he was some day going to be a working dog.  When Manuel took him and sold him to become an Alaska sled dog, Buck was nowhere near ready. 

Although he was big and furry, and kept himself in reasonable shape, he had never been in the snow and didn’t know how to pull a sled.  He had also never been mistreated, and certainly not beaten.  Buck's life changed completely and he had to learn to survive with commands from dogs and people.

Compare and contrast the rise of the Klan with the popularity of Marcus Garvey’s Back to Africa Movement.

Both the rise of the second movement of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) and Marcus Garvey's Back to Africa movement occurred during the 1910's and 1920's, a time of great political conservatism in some ways and a time of racist backlash against the gains African-Americans had made as workers and soldiers during World War I. The Klan, originally founded in 1866 in Tennessee, was re-started in 1915. In the 1920s, the Klan grew drastically in membership, in part through a professional network of recruiters. The organization was anti-Catholic, nativist, anti-Semitic, and racist.

Marcus Garvey's Back to Africa Movement, called the Universal Negro Improvement Association (UNIA), was similar to the rebirth of the Klan in that it resulted from the racism that ran rampant in the 1910s and 1920s. African-Americans were reeling from events such as the East St. Louis race riots in 1917, and Garvey, who had immigrated to the U.S. from Jamaica in 1916, promoted the Back to Africa movement (which had had earlier incarnations before the Civil War) as a way to salvage Black pride. Garvey urged African-Americans to return to Africa and even started cruise lines to help their journey. He was ultimately convicted of mail fraud charges and deported to Jamaica in 1927, never to return to the U.S. While his movement also arose from the racism of the 1920s, he claimed, obviously unlike the Klan, that his movement was intended to help African-Americans.

What is being compared in lines 1-6 in "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning"? How are the two things similar?

In "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" the speaker encourages his lover to handle their upcoming separation bravely. The first six lines set up a comparison between the calm, dignified death of men who have lived good lives and the similarly dignified behavior which the speaker is hoping to see from his love.

The poem is structured as a set of conceits, or complex images that create logical equivalences between objects or situations that may, at first glance, seem very unlike one another. Metaphysical poets like John Donne are known for their extensive use of such comparisons, and since they are often expressed in long, grammatically complex sentences that stretch over several lines or even stanzas of the poem, they can be difficult to parse. When you encounter such conceits, try using strong punctuation marks, such as colons or semi-colons, to mark the divisions of thought; they often help to break the poetic argument into more manageable steps.

The poem's first stanza is comprised of one long clause ending in a colon, which signals the reader that the first stanza is one complete unit of thought. Indeed, in this case, it provides us with the first part of the comparison: a man close to death. Because he has been "virtuous" in life, he has nothing to fear in death and can face it so calmly and quietly that the friends around his bedside cannot even tell precisely when his breathing stops. The second stanza, beginning with "so," introduces the second part of the comparison. Just as the good man dies calmly, the speaker urges his lover to "make no noise" when they have to part. He wants her to avoid "sigh-tempests" and other melodramatic expressions of sorrow that the "laity" might use so that their love can be set apart as superior.

The conceit suggests a similarity between death and the parting of the lovers. While physical death results in permanent separation, the lovers' separation will only be temporary; but by comparing their situation to one that has even more serious consequences, the speaker aims to both conciliate and counsel his lover. The virtuous death brings religious considerations into the poem which are further strengthened by Donne's use of the words "laity" and "profanation" in lines 7-8. We are in sacred territory here, and by using this terminology to talk about their relationship, the speaker elevates it to the level of the holy. Having imparted this sacred character to their love, the speaker is able to compare himself and his lover to priests or special initiates whose superior understanding places them far above the "laity;" just as the virtuous man's quiet acceptance of death is a mark of his spiritual maturity, their ability to part from one another without vulgar expressions of overwrought sentimentality will be an outward sign of their love's transcendence.

What is the symbolism of the ice in "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner"?

In lines 41-44, the Mariner tells the guest that a storm began to blow the ship south, toward the South Pole. They encounter mist, snow, and icebergs. Eventually, they are surrounded by ice.

The ice was here, the ice was there,

The ice was all around: 

It cracked and growled, and roared and howled, 

Like noise in a swound! 

A "swound" is a "swoon," meaning that the noise and cold are so extreme as to induce fainting. This is a dire predicament and had they become permanently stuck in this icy world, it is probable that they would have died then and there. This is when the albatross arrives and they welcome it "As if it had been a Christian soul, / We hailed it in God's name." They feed the bird and it flies around. The ice breaks up and a south wind begins to blow them north.

The ice symbolizes potential death. The cold weather and being stuck in the ice is enough to end their lives. There is also the added symbolism of the coldness of death, the coldness of a corpse, and the frozen image of lifeless bodies. Being freed of the ice, the sailors regain hope.

The sailors regard the albatross as a sign from God because its arrival corresponds with their escape from the ice (their escape from death). Then the Mariner shoots the albatross for no reason. The others blame him for killing the good omen, but then they blame the albatross for the subsequent fog and consider that it might have been a bad omen. They reinterpret things once again when they become stranded with no wind. They then hang the albatross around the Mariner's neck. 

The ice literally threatens death. It therefore symbolizes death for that reason as well as for its associations with the images of lifelessness and frozen bodies. Following these events, the sailors cannot make up their minds about the meaning of the albatross, but they eventually lay all blame upon the Mariner for his senseless act. 

In the market for automobiles, assume that there is only one firm with 100% market power, and this firm produces only one kind of car. The market...

The key here is recognizing that we have a monopoly on our hands, and under a monopoly, the price will not be set equal to the marginal cost. Instead, marginal cost will be equal to marginal revenue, which is strictly lower than the price because increasing the number of goods sold requires decreasing the price.

So first, let's compute the marginal revenue. This is the derivative of revenue (P*Q) with respect to quantity (Q):

MR = d[P*Q]/dQ = dP/dQ * Q + P

We can substitute in our demand curve:
Q_d = 40,000 – (1/100)*P

P = 100*(40,000 - Q)

dP/dQ = -100

MR = (-100) * Q + 100*(40,000 - Q)

MR = 4,000,000 - 200*Q

Now we want to set this equal to marginal cost. Marginal cost is the derivative of total cost, again with respect to quantity.

For some reason they gave us quantity as N instead of Q, but it comes to the same thing:

TC = 25 * Q^2

MC = d[TC]/dQ = 50 * Q

Now the monopoly sets marginal revenue equal to marginal cost:

MR = MC

4,000,000 - 200*Q = 50*Q

4,000,000 = 250*Q

16,000 = Q (N automobiles)

Substitute this back into the demand curve:

P = 100*(40,000 - Q)

P = 100*(40,000 - 16,000)

P = $2,400,000

These numbers seem a bit weird ($2.4 million for each car? These must be Aston Martins!), but that's what they gave us. They do work out mathematically.

To get the profit made, we find the revenue P*Q and subtract the total cost:

profit = P*Q - TC

profit = P*Q - 25*Q^2

profit = (2,400,000)*(16,000) - 25*(16,000)^2 = 38,400,000,000  - 6,400,000,000

profit = $32,000,000,000

The profit is $32 billion. Not bad!

How are nobles (Macbeth, Malcolm, Banquo, Lennox etc.) represented in Shakespeare's Macbeth?

The nobles that we meet, with the exception of Macbeth, are all represented as fairly honest, loyal men.  Initially, even Macbeth is presented in this way, as he is rewarded for his courageous service to the throne in the battles against the rebel Macdonwald and with the king of Norway's army.  Duncan lauds Banquo, too, for his services in these clashes.  Ross, too, is trusted by Duncan, and happily tells Macbeth of his reward for his excellent valor: Duncan has given him the title, Thane of Cawdor, since the old Thane was a traitor.  The only nobles we hear of who are really guilty of wrongdoing (besides, later, Macbeth) are Macdonwald and the Thane of Cawdor, and Macbeth kills the first in battle while the other is executed for treason almost as soon as the play begins.  

Though Macbeth's loyalty falls to his pride and ambition, Banquo's never does.  He does enjoy the idea that his descendants will be kings, but he is unwilling to do anything dishonest or immoral to make it happen.  Lennox identifies Macbeth as a "tyrant" and strongly suspects that he killed both Duncan and Banquo to achieve and maintain his position (3.6.25); his anger and indignation paint him as loyal and honorable as well.  Further, Ross later laments the current state of Scotland with Lady Macduff, showing that he, too, is a Scot loyal to the country and not its awful ruler.  Finally, Malcolm, too, is likely the most honest as he never tells a lie until he does so to test Macduff's honesty.  Both turn out to be honorable men with Scotland's best interest at heart, and they determine to wrench it from the greedy Macbeth's grip.

What is the relationship between Romeo and Juliet in the play, Romeo and Juliet, by William Shakespeare?

The relationship between Romeo and Juliet can be largely defined as the passionate, all-consuming first “love” of two relatively naive teenagers, as that is what the characters are. Juliet is 13 years old (Act 1, scene 2, line 12), and assumedly, Romeo is not much older. And while Juliet is advised by her mother to begin thinking very seriously about marriage, both her and Romeo are very inexperienced in romance. Romeo is initially infatuated with Rosaline, whose lack of reciprocating feelings causes him to be morose and cynical about “love” on the whole (Act 1, scene 1, lines 189-197), which reveal his affection and understanding of love revolve more around the concept of “love” rather than on a specific person. Romeo and Juliet fall in love entirely on appearances, with Romeo completely snapping out of his previous grief, claiming “Did my heart love till now? Forswear it, sight! For I ne’er saw true beauty till this night.” (Act 1, scene 5, lines 54-55). Juliet experiences a similarly quick reaction, as she says to Romeo, “My ears have yet not drunk a hundred words of thy tongue’s uttering, yet I know the sound.” (Act 2, scene 2, lines 58-59). And despite her recognition of the unadvisable quickness of their affections in lines 117-118 in Act 2, scene 2, “...I have no joy of this contact tonight. It is too rash, too unadvised, too sudden…” Juliet and Romeo’s love continues to overshadow everything else.  Juliet proclaims, “if all else fail, myself have power to die,” in answer to her possible marriage to Paris, indicating her desire to die rather than be with someone besides Romeo (Act 3, scene 5, line 244). Juliet’s love for Romeo surpasses her grief over his killing her cousin, Tybalt, as she reconciles, “My husband lives, that Tybalt would have slain; And Tybalt’s dead, that would have slain my husband. All this is comfort…” (Act 3, scene 2, lines 105-107). And while Juliet and Romeo may love with intensity, it’s still a very immature, illogical love. This is evidenced in Romeo’s actions after his banishment, when he weakly attempts to stab himself. As the Friar states in lines 117-118, Romeo failed to think of how his suicide would have affected Juliet. The blinding nature of their loves, coupled with their relative inexperience, culminates in their eventual suicides, spurred by Romeo’s failure to control his emotions in the wake of hearing of Juliet’s “death.”

What are some literary devices used in Mercutio's quote in Act I of Romeo and Juliet: "If love be rough with you, be rough with love. / Prick love...

In Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, the Bard employs the dramatic character of the foil. A foil is a character set up as a contrast to another character. This contrast makes the particular qualities of each character stand out. The Nurse is a foil to Juliet and, likewise, Mercutio is a foil to Romeo. Both Romeo and Juliet are romantics who idealize love as spiritual and a mutual adoration between two people. In contrast, the Nurse and Mercutio are anti-romantic and emphasize the sexual and physical aspects of love.

In Act I, Scene 4, Romeo, Mercutio, Benvolio and the other Montague men are on their way to Capulet's party. It is known to Mercutio that Romeo has been spurned in his affection for Rosaline. Ever the skeptic and joker, Mercutio advises Romeo to have fun at the party and to dance. But Romeo is very serious over his recent lack of success with Rosaline. He contemplates the cruel aspects of love when he says,

Is love a tender thing? It is too rough,

Too rude, too boisterous, and it pricks like thorn.

Mercutio's bawdy and sexually charged reply uses both a personification of love and a pun on the word prick. He says,

If love be rough with you, be rough with love.

Prick love for pricking, and you beat love down.

He personifies love as someone that can be beaten down and uses two meanings of the word prick, the one that sticks, as Romeo uses it, and the second a reference to the male genitalia. He is telling Romeo to forget about love and just have sex. 

How do you balance a chemical equation?

Balanced Equations

When an equation is balanced, there are the same numbers of each type of atom on the reactant and product sides of the equation.

For example, the following equation is balanced because there are four Al atoms and six O atoms on both sides of the equation.

`~4Al + 3~o_2 -gt ~2Al_2O_3 `

 Reactants              Products

4 Al atoms             4 Al atoms

6 O atoms              6 O atoms

How to Balance an Equation

It is important to remember what you can and can’t do when balancing equations.

• You can add coefficients in front of substances.


• You cannot add coefficients in the middle of substances.


• You cannot change subscripts.

Let’s look at an example of how to balance an equation. The following equation is unbalanced.

`~Au_2S_3 + ~H_2 -gt Au + ~H_2S `

Step 1: Make a list of how many atoms of each element are present on the reactant and product sides of the equation.

`~Au_2S_3 + ~H_2 -gt Au + ~H_2S`

Reactants              Products

Au: 2                    Au 1

S: 3                      S: 1

H: 2                      H: 2

Step 2: Choose one of the unbalanced atoms to start with.

Let’s start with Au. There are two Au atoms on the reactant side, but only one Au atom on the product side.

Remember, when a subscript is not indicated for an atom, the subscript is actually “1”. i.e.  Au is the same as `~Au_1` .

Ask yourself “What number can I multiply with the subscript of the Au atom, on the product side of the equation, that will give me the same number of Au atoms as are on the reactant side of the equation?” The answer would be 2.

So, we will add a coefficient of 2 in front of the Au atom on the product side of the equation.

`~Au_2S_3 + ~H_2 -gt 2Au + ~H_2S`

Reactants              Products

Au: 2                      Au 2

S: 3                        S: 1

H: 2                        H: 2

Notice that there are now two Au atoms on both sides of the equation.

Step 3: Choose another unbalanced atom.

The only other currently unbalanced atom is S.

Ask yourself “What number can I multiply with the subscript of the S on the product side of the equation, that will give me the same number of S atoms as are on the reactant side of the equation?” The answer would be 3.

So, we will add a coefficient of 3 in front of the compound containing the S atom on the product side of the equation.

`~Au_2S_3 + ~H_2 -gt 2Au + ~3H_2S`

Reactants              Products

Au: 2                      Au 2

S: 3                        S: 3

H: 2                        H: 6

Notice that the coefficient is placed in front of the entire `~H_2S` compound. It is NOT placed in the middle of the compound. This changes the number of S atoms on the product side to three AND it changes the number of H atoms on the product side to 6. So, now the H atoms are unbalanced!

Step 4: Balance the last unbalanced atom.

The last unbalanced atom is H.

Ask yourself “What number can I multiply with the subscript of the H on the reactant side of the equation that will give me the same number of H atoms as are on the product side of the equation?" The answer would be “3”.

So, we will add a coefficient of 3 in front of the H atoms on the reactant side of the equation.

`~Au_2S_3 + ~3H_2 -gt 2Au + ~3H_2S`

Reactants              Products

Au: 2                      Au 2

S: 3                        S: 3

H: 6                        H: 6

The equation is now balanced.

In Lord Of The Flies, how do Jack and Ralph react and answer questions about the beast?

The first mention of the beast occurs in chapter two during the afternoon meeting. Ralph and Jack both, each in his own way, mention the importance of rules whilst Piggy makes everyone aware that nobody knows where they are. Ralph then comforts them by saying that they are on a good island since there is enough food. It is then that the boy with mulberry-colored birthmark whispers to Piggy about the 'snake-thing' which he later calls a 'beastie.' The boy mentions that it was 'ever so big' and that he had seen in the woods.

Ralph is the first to respond:

“You couldn’t have a beastie, a snake-thing, on an island this size,” Ralph explained kindly. “You only get them in big countries, like Africa, or India.”

When the boy mentions to Piggy that he had seen it in the dark, Ralph suggests that he then could not have seen it. When the boy insists, Ralph mentions that it must have been a dream. He does not, however, find much agreement in the faces of especially the younger boys, although the older ones agree. Ralph also suggests that the boy must have had a nightmare, a statement which drew a similar response.

The boy, though, insists that the beastie will come that night. Ralph's response is to insist that there is no beast. Ralph does not know what more to say and is both amused and exasperated at the same time. It is clear that he wishes to deal with the issue by just denying the boy's fears, which indicates his immaturity and naivety.

At this point, Jack grabbed the conch and declared:

“Ralph’s right of course. There isn’t a snake-thing. But if there was a snake we’d hunt it and kill it. We’re going to hunt pigs to get meat for everybody. And we’ll look for the snake too–”

At this, Ralph shouts that there isn't a snake and Jack asserts that they will make sure when they go hunting. Ralph is annoyed and has no idea of how to respond. The only thing he can do is to, once again, deny its existence. He asserts his conviction a third time, with more emphasis:

“But I tell you there isn’t a beast!”

At this, there is silence. Ralph then changes the subject and speaks about having fun and being rescued. He then focuses the boys attention on the idea of rescue and how they can assist in their discovery. The beast is temporarily forgotten.

Talk about the beast recurs in chapter five when Ralph mentions that things seemed to be breaking up and that there was talk about fear and that 'people were getting frightened.' He mentions:

“But that’s littluns’ talk. We’ll get that straight. So the last part, the bit we can all talk about, is kind of deciding on the fear.”

Ralph wants everyone to be happy and focus on important stuff, not talk about bogies and things which frighten them - they have to decide what it is that makes them so afraid. Jack takes up the conch and says the following:

“So this is a meeting to find out what’s what. I’ll tell you what’s what. You littluns started all this, with the fear talk. Beasts! Where from? Of course we’re frightened sometimes but we put up with being frightened. Only Ralph says you scream in the night. What does that mean but nightmares? Anyway, you don’t hunt or build or help—you’re a lot of cry-babies and sissies. That’s what. And as for the fear—you’ll have to put up with that like the rest of us.”

It is clear that Jack takes an aggressive stance on the issue and feels that the boys who are affected by their fear are a bunch of cry babies. He then mentions an animal and then declares that he is a hunter who has been all around the island and that he had not seen an animal or beast anywhere. He insists that he would have seen it if it were there.

In the end, since the issue could not be entirely resolved and Sam n' Eric had declared that they had seen the beast at the top of the mountain, it is decided to find it. All the older boys then set out to explore the island and suss it out. Piggy is left behind with the littluns.

What the issue about the beast makes clear is the difference in approach by Ralph and Jack. Ralph wishes to rationalise the issue by disclaiming the existence of such a creature - it is only a figment of the boys' imaginations and not real. Jack, conversely, has a much more gung-ho and practical approach. Any threat to their safety must be hunted down and destroyed. His attitude here predicts his actions later, when he turns against Ralph and, with his hunters, seeks him out to be rid of him.

What is the difference between literature and other subjects, such as history, geography, biology, chemistry, and physics?

The major difference between these two types of subjects is that the first group of subjects deals with ideas that generally cannot be experimented on and falsified while the second group of subjects deals with ideas that can be.

The sciences, in general, deal with ideas that can be subjected to the scientific method.  They can be experimented on and proven false.  For example, if you believe that a heavier ball will fall faster than a lighter ball, you do not have to resort to theorizing and thinking about it.  Instead, assuming you have the right apparatus, you can drop two balls of varying weights and experimentally determine whether your hypothesis was correct.

By contrast, you cannot really do this with literature, history, and other such subjects.  For example, if you believe that Hamlet is more tragic and more powerful than King Lear, there is no way that you can subject that to an experiment.  You cannot objectively prove that your subjective judgement is correct.  You can give evidence that supports your idea, but you cannot perform experiments that can confirm or deny your original opinion.

Because of this, the first group of subjects that you ask about deals more with opinions than with facts.  There are, of course, facts involved.  The date that India became independent is a fact.  The number of lines in a sonnet is a fact.  However, most of what is interesting about these subjects is opinion.  What makes a sonnet great is an opinion as is the identity of the person most responsible for India becoming independent.  This is different from the second group of subjects that you mention, in which opinions play much less of a role.

Can you provide a Hollywood movie that promotes materialism?

Pick a Hollywood movie.  Seriously, just pick one, and I'm confident it promotes materialism.  

Materialism is basically finding meaning and value in life through owning stuff.  

Ironman has Tony Stark.  Yes, he is a hero, but an incredibly materialistic one.  He demands owning the best of the best.  

Pick any Fast and Furious movie.  The characters don't just want cars to get from point A to B.  They want the most amazing cars ever.  In the most recent film, the one character is seen driving a $1,000,000 Bugati Veyron.  

Limitless.  Instead of using his newly acquired super brain to tackle things like ending world hunger or finding a cure for cancer, he uses it to make tons of money and buy lots of toys.  

Sex and the City.  It's a movie about shopping. . . and more shopping. 

Crazy Stupid Love. It's about a guy that buys nice stuff in order to be cool and woo women. 

Pretty Woman.   The main character is not happy until a crazy rich guy starts buying her stuff.  

Clueless.  It's about teenagers shopping. 

Devil Wears Prada.  Main character doesn't get any respect until she starts buying nice stuff.  

What is the mood in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein?

The mood of Frankenstein is one of foreboding, or tragedy or evil, that is to come. The first-person point of view from Victor Frankenstein allows the narration to reflect the hard-earned wisdom that he gained from his actions. It is clear from the moment of Victor’s interest in alchemy that no good will come from this. This fact that he immediately abandoned his creature left a sense of approaching doom: Victor does not know what has become of the creature. He makes the leap to the conclusion that it is the creature who has killed his little brother William, as well as causing the guilt to be placed on Justine, who is executed as a murderess. With each event, this leads the reader along, knowing that the creature’s actions will lead him on to more and more murders. On the way, however, the reader learns the creature’s story and manages to gain some sympathy for, perhaps even identification with, him. This gives a paradoxical feeling for the “monster.” With the tragic ending and the creature’s remorse, this becomes less of a horror story than a tale of lost opportunity and love.

According to the Declaration of Independence, from what source does the government get its power?

According to the Declaration of Independence, governments derive "their just powers from the consent of the governed." This principle, known to political theorists as "popular sovereignty," is what separates a legitimate government from one that is not. Indeed, the goal of the revolutionaries who issued the Declaration was to establish a government that was so established. The purpose of such a government would be to protect the rights of the people, including life, liberty, and property. If the government failed to do this (as, they argued, the British government had) or actually became "destructive" of the rights of the people, it was their right to get rid of it through revolution. Then, the Declaration says, they could establish a new government based on these principles that would be responsive to the will of the people. These ideas are usually traced to the English political philosopher John Locke, whose "social contract" theory suggested that only governments founded upon the consent of the governed were legitimate or likely to survive.

How does Ralph change in the novel Lord of the Flies?

At the beginning of the novel, Ralph is rather optimistic and openly accepts the position as the boys' leader. Ralph believes that the boys will be able to survive and has hope that they will be rescued. As the novel progresses, Ralph becomes disenchanted with his role as the boys' leader. His inexperience as a leader is evident as the boys refuse to complete tasks and dismiss his directives. Ralph experiences Jack's antagonistic nature and begins to become depressed. As the boys join Jack's tribe to engage in savage behavior, Ralph loses hope in being rescued. There are several scenes throughout the novel that portray Ralph giving into his primitive nature like the other boys. Ralph not only hunts but participates in Simon's murder. Ralph's physical appearance parallels the boys' descent into savagery as his hair continues to grow and his body becomes filthy. At the end of the novel, Ralph is forced to embrace his primitive nature when he is being hunted by Jack's tribe. Ralph runs through the forest, hiding in the foliage like a pig. By the time the naval officer arrives, Ralph is a broken child who has lost hope in humanity.

How has the "American Dream" of James Truslow Adams been denied to some groups in American history?

The myth of the American Dream is an ethos that still permeates in American culture to this day. The idea that anybody can be successful in this country through hard work is a romantic and powerful one. Bernie Sanders, who is attempting to secure the Democratic nomination for president as this paper is being written, is on record in stating that the American Dream has become a nightmare. But has the dream ever really existed since the founding of this republic? Was it always a nightmare for many? It can be demonstrated that the American Dream is simply a mantra that has developed out of the belief in American Exceptionalism.

When James Truslow Adams wrote The American Dream in 1931, even his words are filled with contradictions. On one hand he speaks "of a land in which life should be better and richer....for everyone" but then states that opportunity is granted "for each according to ability or achievement." Since every American can not be expected to have equal ability and levels of achievement, how can everybody be richer and better. Additionally, who gets to define what abilities are important and what can be considered "achievement." When equality is only assigned based on the merits of ability, is there truly opportunity for all?
When those defining "ability" are those that are powerful, what impact does this have on the weaker elements of society?

Adams seems to perpetrate this contradiction throughout the essay. He states that the American Dream should not be defined by wealth, but in reality, the entire social system in the United States is revolved around the acquisition of capital and wealth. He states that all people should achieve status based on their natural abilities. This seems to contradict much of what has happened in the history of the United States. When the Constitution was written in 1789, only white males were included in the American Dream. Women and African-Americans were denied essential liberties like the ability to participate in government, be formally educated, own property, or the ability to use their "innate capabilities" to achieve success. These rights were not even considered for women and African-Americans during the first century of the history of the United States.

The reality of the American Dream in the early history of the United States was the Anglo-Saxon males would have access to the fruits of liberty that were harvested by the American Revolution. Any attempts by poor colonists to created an equal economic system were ignored. In the South, a minority of powerful landowners exploited slaves and Irish immigrants in an effort to acquire vast sums of wealth. Any efforts by poor whites and slaves to unite to uproot this feudal system were met with violence and legislation that outlawed fraternization between the races. Racism emerged as a tool to separate poor whites and enslaved blacks in the South. In the northern United States, an industrial elite class emerged that exploited poor Americans and new immigrants to the United States. While the North came to see the slavery in the South as immoral and un-American, the industrial system prevented most Americans from realizing the American Dream.

The situation for poor people in the United States did not improve with the Union victory in the Civil War. In the South, African-Americans were free but did not have access to the American Dream. Blacks realized a short period of political power in the South during Union occupation during Reconstruction. When the troops left the former Confederate states, these gains were quickly stripped. The freedmen were not educated, did not have capital, and were still stuck in a system in which racism was deeply ingrained. Most of the freedmen remained on the farm and could not make a profit off of their own efforts. Others were targets of violence. All were subject to Jim Crow Laws and black codes that restricted their Constitutional Rights.

Can it be stated that all African-Americans were devoid of talent and intellect during this period? Statistically and biologically speaking, this is completely unlikely, if not impossible. So where was their access to the American Dream? Why could they not "attain the fullest stature of which they were innately capable?" What about women from the same time period? They were not even able to vote or maintain their own property after marriage. By law, women were servants to their husbands. It can be stated that the American Dream is only meant for a small percentage of white Americans that already have vast sums of capital. To lose this wealth would mean to lose power and prestige. Throughout American history, this elite group would do everything in its power to protect this status.

The Reconstruction era in the North was one of tremendous economic growth because of the factory systems of Industrialism. One would have thought with all of the 'rags to riches' stories being touted, the American Dream was coming to fruition. This was clearly not the cases. When you consider that eleven of twelve families during this period lived below the poverty line, it is easy to see that this was not the case. As the notion of the American Dream permeated to the poor in Europe, millions migrated to the United States for a piece of the American pie. Roughly half would return to Europe unsatisfied. Factories exploited poor whites and immigrants with dangerous working conditions, low wages, and long hours. Women were hired at even lower wages. This grossly unequal system could not endure forever could it?

When workers organized with demands for better conditions and demanded opportunity, they were met with violence. It seemed like the dream was not meant for them. During the period between the turn of the Twentieth Century and World War I, a strong wave of socialist and communist activity alarmed those in the American government. Some of these labor movements advocated violence and revolution. Congress did not want to see the economic system that benefited the elite toppled by the far left. As a result, Congress made concessions to the workers in the form of labor and business reforms. The progressive legislation did very little to impact the social class system that was in place in the United States, however.

This technique of giving the oppressed small gains that truly did not affect the system of inequality in the United States has been a theme throughout the history of the Republic. During the New Deal, the federal government granted reforms in an effort to protect the system of capitalism. Many of the reforms were made to protect banks and large industries deemed too important to fail. Some reforms were even eliminated by the judicial branch. This method was again demonstrated by the Great Society programs of the 1950's. Many of these efforts have had the effect of making certain groups dependent on the federal government for survival. This is certainly not the system that Adams was speaking of in The American Dream.

In examining who benefits from the American Dream, it is easy to recognize that wealthy white men with large sums of capital are the beneficiary. This would suggest that America is not exceptional, but rather the same as many societies that have existed on earth since the dawn of civilization. This is not a system that is evolving either, as income inequality is as steep in America today as it ever has been. When taking all of these facts into consideration, it becomes obvious that the American Dream is a myth.

What are the differences between President Lincoln's reconstruction plan and the reconstruction plan of Congress known as the Wade-Davis Bill?

Both President Lincoln and Congress presented a plan for Reconstruction before the war ended. President Lincoln believed the President should be directing the reconstruction process. There were some differences between the two plans.

President Lincoln’s plan was known as the Ten Percent Plan. It required that 10% of the voters of a state had to agree to be loyal to the United States. Then the state could develop a new constitution that banned slavery. The Wade-Davis Bill required over 50% of the voters of a state to agree to be loyal to the United States. The only people who could be involved in writing the new state constitutions were white males who indicated they had not fought against the Union. President Lincoln’s plan didn’t address this issue. President Lincoln’s plan also offered forgiveness, or amnesty, to white southerners who promised to be loyal to the United States. However, this offer of amnesty didn’t apply to the leaders of the Confederacy. The Wade-Davis Bill had to be signed by President Lincoln in order for it to go into effect. However, he vetoed the Wade-Davis Bill.

Both President Lincoln and Congress had reconstruction plans before the Civil War ended.

What do Jem and Scout find the next time in the Radley’s tree?

Scout was the one who first found a gift from Boo Radley in the knothole of the old tree.  She spotted "tin-foil was sticking out... in the afternoon sun."  Scout then "reached into the hole, and withdrew two pieces of chewing gum minus their outer wrappers."  Jem got mad at Scout for chewing the gum.  As most local children did, Jem had been hearing rumors about Boo Radley for years.  People said that Boo ate animals, was over six feet tall, and had a large scar on his face.  He was viewed with suspicion and fear, which was why Jem was fearful.  

Jem and Scout soon began finding other items in the tree knothole.  Boo left them two "Indian-head pennies," a ball of twine, and two figurines that resembled Jem and Scout.  These figurines were carved out of soap.  He later left them a spelling bee award and a pocket watch with missing mechanical pieces, which was on a chain with a knife made of aluminum.  Boo communicated to the children through his gifts.  At first they viewed their mysterious neighbor with fear.  As he gave them gifts, they began to view Boo as a friend.

What factors seem to be shaping Brutus’ conscience when he decides that Caesar must die in Julius Caesar?

Brutus argues that Caesar has done nothing wrong yet and is not a bad person, but he is ambitious and ambition is dangerous.

Brutus knows Caesar very well.  He has been like a father to Brutus, whose own father died when he was young.  Brutus does not want to kill Caesar, but he worries about the fate of Rome.  After the conspirators ask him to join them, he ponders the assassination in a soliloquy.

Brutus begins by suggesting that although he personally does not have a reason to hate Caesar, he worries that Caesar being crowned king would change him.

It must be by his death: and for my part,
I know no personal cause to spurn at him,
But for the general. He would be crown'd:
How that might change his nature, there's the question. (Act 2, Scene 1)

Brutus worries about the “abuse of greatness” and fears that Caesar will turn into a tyrant because he is already ambitious.

But 'tis a common proof,
That lowliness is young ambition's ladder,
Whereto the climber-upward turns his face;
But when he once attains the upmost round.
He then unto the ladder turns his back,
Looks in the clouds, scorning the base degrees
By which he did ascend.  (Act 2, Scene 1)

This is the main argument against Caesar. The conspirators believe that Caesar has taken too much power upon himself by being dictator, and that he will leverage the power he has to pre-empt the senate and declare himself king.  Once king, they fear that the Roman republic will be dead, and the senate with it.

Brutus argues that the only thing to do is kill Caesar before he has a chance to do this.  He describes Caesar as a baby snake, and says the only way to deal with him would be to kill him in his shell.  With this, Brutus is committed to killing Caesar in his mind.  He believes that doing so is the only way to save Rome.

What did the New England Emigrant Aid do?

The New England Emigrant Aid Company was a venture that was hatched by a Massachusetts legislator by the name of Eli Thayer. It was an attempt to keep Kansas as a free state by moving abolitionists to Kansas. With the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the people of Kansas had the choice, through elections, to decide if the territory would be a slave state or not. Thayer felt that by funding the migration of people from his free state to travel to Kansas, they could influence the popular vote on the issue of slavery.

The company did not have success if you gauge the number of migrants as an indicator. Thayer hoped to move tens of thousands of migrants to Kansas to guarantee the territory would not institute slavery. Historians are not in agreement as to the exact number, but it was no more than 2,500 people that accepted the offer to move. The influx of people from free states did motivate people from Missouri to move into Kansas and the entire process resulted in violence.

What are the pros and cons of providing a free college education to American students?

The opportunity to obtain a college education is considered to be a valuable opportunity which gives people a chance to get a better job, make more money, and have a better life.  However, for many people the opportunity to obtain a college education may be out of reach due to the significant financial expenditure that is necessary.  College tuition today is extremely high, causing some people to miss out on the chance to receive a college education.

The pros of providing a free college education include:  giving students of less financial means an opportunity to attend college, helping to increase the level of education of the nation, and reducing student debt.  A free college education would give every student that makes certain grades the opportunity to go to college no matter how much money the student's parents have.  This would help to encourage students from low income backgrounds to do well in school.  In addition, the overall educational level of the country could increase, making the nation better.  Furthermore, a free college education would reduce the number of students leaving college with tremendous debt that can take years to pay off.

The cons of providing a free college education include:  higher taxes, less incentives for parents to work hard, and less incentives for students to do well in college.  Taxes would be increased because the free college education would have to be paid for with tax dollars. Furthermore, many students may not be as motivated to do well in college if neither the students nor their parents have to pay for their education.

How does Simon of Lord of the Flies perceive himself?

Simon is the protector of the weaker children and the visionary for the older boys on the island.  From the beginning, he is set apart from both groups when, at the first meeting, he collapses, seemingly from epilepsy.  He also sets himself apart by disappearing to his meditation garden, his secret hiding spot, where he enjoys spending time alone. 

Simon takes time to retrieve fruit for the younger children, the littluns, that they can not reach.  He feels obligated to care for their physical hunger and can not walk past them and ignore their need.  He also helps Piggy--by far the weakest of the older children--retrieve his glasses when Jack knocks them away.  Simon does this in a non-confrontational way, which characterizes his personality.  

Simon's other self-assigned role is that of missionary, of truth-bearer.  He encourages Ralph by telling Ralph that he will make it home all right.  He confronts both the sacrificial pig head, which defiled his sacred garden, and the parachute man, which is misunderstood to be the beast.  Simon feels duty-bound to deliver the truth to the other boys, and he pays a scapegoat's price: When the others deceive themselves into thinking Simon is the beast, they murder him without conscience.

Simon cares deeply for all the boys on the island.  He demonstrates this care differently, depending on the personality of the recipient.  He is the most sensitive and spiritual of all the characters.

What were the similarities and differences between Montesquieu, Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau's philosophy, ideas, and views on government?

Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Baron de Montesquieu, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau were all political philosophers that debated the question of who was best fit to control the government. Thomas Hobbes stood out among the four philosophers in that he believed that a strong absolute monarchy was the best form of government. His support of absolute monarchs stemmed from his belief that men, in nature, acted in their own self-interests and could not be trusted to act for the good of society. His theory was that in order to secure a peaceful and orderly society, people formed a social contract with an absolute ruler that would sacrifice individual liberties for the good of the whole. The only similarity in theories with the other philosophers was the idea of a need for people to form a social contract with the government.

Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau leaned towards a more democratic system of government. They felt that there were unalienable rights of life, liberty, and property that a government was responsible for protecting. Their idea of a social contract was reciprocal in nature meaning that while citizens granted government sovereignty, the government was to guarantee that these freedoms were protected. Locke was the first to propose that these were unalienable rights.

Montesquieu also opposed the idea of an absolute monarchy and believed that the main purpose of government was to maintain law and order and protect the political liberty and property of the individual. Montesquieu advocated a system of elected representatives that were separated into branches to separate and balance power. Montesquieu was similar with John Locke in the idea of representative government and popular sovereignty.

Jean Jacque Rousseau was different from Thomas Hobbes in that he believed in the inherent nature of people to do good and act for the best of the group. With that in mind, Rousseau advocated for a form of direct democracy in which all citizens are permitted to vote on laws and the operations of government. Rousseau agreed with Locke and Montesquieu that government's principal responsibility was to protect the rights of the people.

The derivative of `y=2^(x^3+2x)`

We will use the following rules and formulas:

• Chain rule `(f(g(x)))'=f'(g(x))cdot g'(x)`
  


• Derivation of exponential function `(a^x)'=a^x ln a`
  


• Derivation of sum `(f(x)+g(x))'=f'(x)+g'(x)` 


• Derivation of power `(x^n)'=nx^(n-1)`
  

First we apply chain rule and derivation of exponential function.

`y'=2^(x^3+2x)ln2cdot(x^3+2x)'`

Now we apply derivation of sum.

`=2^(x^3+2x)ln2cdot((x^3)'+(2x)')`

Now we apply derivation of power.

`=2^(x^3+2x)ln2cdot(3x^2+2)`

Therefore, the solution is `y'=2^(x^3+2x)ln2cdot(3x^2+2)` 

What happened during the Second Crusade?

The Second Crusade (1147-1149 AD) began as a result of the fall of Edessa, a European "Crusader state" in the Middle East, to Muslim forces. Pope Eugene III called a crusade to recapture Edessa, and King Louis VII of France and King Conrad III of Germany answered that call.

The two Christian kings marched separately into the Middle East. Each army suffered defeats en route by the hands of the Seljuk Turks. Once Louis and Conrade reached Jerusalem--another Crusader state--they united their armies and took their 50,000 soldiers to attack the Muslim-controlled stronghold of Damascus. The Muslims soundly defeated the Europeans, who dejectedly retreated to Jerusalem and eventually home to Europe.

The failure of the Second Crusade was a great embarrassment to Catholic Europe, especially to Louis and Conrad.

How does Brian react to the gruesome scene he encounters in the plane in Hatchet by Gary Paulsen?

Brian is horrified and frightened by the condition of the pilot's body, but he continues salvaging the plane because he must. 

Eventually, Brian goes back to the plane to see what he can salvage.  He hopes to be rescued immediately, but is not.  The plane is half-submerged in the lake, and it is not as easy to get to as he first thought.  Brian struggles to get inside the plane.  He is eventually able to hack into it with his hatchet. 

Brian drops the hatchet and has to go underwater to get it.  The hatchet is crucial to his survival, and Brian berates himself for being stupid enough to drop it.  He eventually manages to retrieve the hatchet and is able to get inside the plane, which is half full of water.  There, Brian is shocked to see fish have been eating away at the pilot, who no longer has flesh on his head.

Too much. Too much. His mind screamed in horror and he slammed back and was sick in the water, sick so that he choked on it and tried to breathe water and could have ended there, ended with the pilot where it almost ended when they first arrived except that his legs jerked. (Ch. 18) 

Brian is aware he is reacting instinctively. He knows he doesn't actually need to fear the fish.  Nonetheless, seeing the pilot's body in this decomposed and eaten-away state is too much for Brian.  He has been through a lot, and this is just another blow.  After all, he is just a boy. 

Brian eventually recovers and is able to do what he came to the plane to do.  He retrieves the survival pack and is able to return to shore with it.  The pack has a sleeping bag, matches, cooking pots, and a knife with a compass.  It even has a hat, which Brian finds funny but wears anyway.  The survival pack also contains a fishing kit and rifle. This pack and all its supplies elicit a lot of optimism from Brian:

He sat in the sun by die doorway where he had dropped the night before and pulled the presents—as he thought of them—out one at a time to examine them, turn them in the light, touch them and feel them with his hands and eyes. (Ch. 19) 

Brian has successfully survived on his own for all of this time without any of these objects, but feels these supplies are treasures of “incredible wealth.”  The pack should make his life easier, and it was worth the horror of facing the pilot’s body. 

Would you describe "Nikki-Rosa" as an ironic poem?

The poem “Nikki-Rosa” is a fine example of situational irony. Situation irony is all about the incongruity between what is expected or believed to be true or going to happen and the reality of what happens.

According to the poet Nikki Giovanni, the white community and the white biographers can never understand that even the childhood of black people could be glorious and full of joy and happiness. The white community’s perception of blacks’ childhood as a “drag” is merely based on appearances and face values. The poet, however, claims that although she is a black woman, “all the while I was quite happy.”

“childhood remembrances are always a drag” – the ironical opening line of the poem reflects the white people’s assumption of a black person’s childhood. To them, the childhood of a black boy or girl is doomed because of poverty.

"Living in Woodlawn/with no inside toilet,” bathing in “big tubs that folk in chicago barbecue in,” a black man’s selling “his stock” and “your father’s drinking” point to a few of those visible aspects of the lives of black people upon which the white biographers base their assumptions that the black children are deprived of any kind of happiness, joy or fun.

But the irony of the situation lies in the fact that material wealth doesn't even seem to bother the poet at all. She says, “though you’re poor it isn't poverty that/concerns you.” On the other hand, a white biographer’s interpretation of blacks’ emotional experience is entirely based on their state of poverty.

The poet has plenty of reasons to laud her childhood days.

“everybody is together and you

and your sister have happy birthdays and very good  

Christmases”

And,

“the whole family attended meetings about Hollydale...”

The poet has known the joy of being together with her family and her black community. She has experienced the delight of sharing each other’s love and sorrow at different times. All these have offered her so much happiness and satisfaction that she claims, “all the while I was quite happy.”

Thus, the thread of situational irony weaves through the whole poem. What’s perceived by the white community of the childhood of a black person stands in stark contrast to the joyous and ecstatic experience of a black person.

While the poet says, "all the while I was quite happy," the white biographer would “never understand/Black love is Black wealth.”

Is there a gender gap in academic achievement? If so, what other factors lead to this gender gap? What are the short-term and long-term effects...

In generations past, a gender gap existed in educational achievement in that men graduated from college at greater rates than women. This gap has now reversed, as women graduate from college in greater rates than men. 

In 1960, twice as many men graduated from college as women (statistics come from Lehigh University College of Education). Women caught up by the mid-1980s and surged ahead, as women now make up about 57% of college graduates. According to the National Center for Education Statistics, women earn college degrees at a rate one third greater than that of men.

Experts continue to debate the factors resulting in this gender gap. Some believe that the attention focused on the educational achievement of girls in recent decades has detracted attention from boys. Others argue that education is not a zero-sum game and that attention devoted to girls doesn't mean attention isn't paid to boys. Other experts believe that schools are more attuned to the educational needs of girls than to those of boys. In other words, schools are more friendly to the needs of girls than boys, who may need more active kinds of learning. Boys are now suspended from school at greater rates than girls, and they are more often diagnosed with attention problems than girls are. Finally, other experts believe that educational achievement is more about race and socio-economic status and that the gender gap is smaller or even not present when factors like race and socio-economic status are considered.

The short-term effects of the gender gap are that more women are graduating from college (as stated above, 57% of college graduates are women). The longer-term effects are harder to figure out for now. For example, even though women graduate with a bachelor's degree at higher numbers than men, women still earn less than men. For each dollar a man earns, a woman earns an average of 77 cents. In addition, top management jobs in Fortune 500 companies are mostly held by men (less than 5% are held by women). However, the education gap is starting to affect men. In the recent recession, the majority of the layoffs affected men, not women, as men held the types of manufacturing jobs that did not require college degrees and that were unfortunately subject to layoffs. Therefore, the economy might be shifting more towards favoring jobs held by women (including jobs such as nursing and education). 

Why is potassium iodine electrically neutral?

The correct name for the chemical compound containing potassium and iodine is potassium iodide. The endings of the names of non-metals is changed to -ide in compound. 

Potassium iodide is an ionic compound with the formula KI. It's electrically neutral because it has equal amounts of positive and negative charge. Potassium forms a +1 ion and iodine forms a -1 ion, so the formula KI has a net charge of zero. (+1 + -1 = 0)

Chemical compounds are always neutral. Ions form compounds by combining in ratios that equalize the postive and negative charge. For example, the formula of magnesium iodide is MgI2. The magnesium ion has two positive charges so it combines with iodine in a ratio of 2 to 1, resulting in a net charge of zero. 

Why does Mr. Avery believe it has snowed?

Mr. Avery is the Finches' heavyset, superstitious neighbor who is notorious for peeing off of his front porch at night. In Chapter 8, Maycomb, Alabama is hit with unusually cold weather. Mr. Avery believes that it is written on the Rosetta Stone that seasons change when children misbehave. Children who disobey their parents, fight and argue with each other, and smoke cigarettes contribute to the changing of seasons. When Maycomb is hit with a light dusting of snow, Jem and Scout walk over to Miss Maudie's yard to gather her snow in an attempt to build a snowman. Mr. Avery sees the children walking on the sidewalk and accosts them. He comments that it hasn't snowed that badly in Maycomb since Appomattox, and it's bad children like Jem and Scout who make the weather change. Scout, being a naive, innocent child, doesn't question Mr. Avery's "meteorological statistics" because they come from the Rosetta Stone.

Describe the teachings of Old Major in Animal Farm.

Old Major is an important figure in the book, even if he dies in chapter two.  He is the one who gives the vision for the rebellion.  His teachings can be summarized with three points. 

First, he speaks of the woes of the animals on the farm.  They work, work, and work, and at the end of their lives they are killed.  In other words, the animals toil, don't enjoy the fruit of their toil, and finally die.  Here are his word:

‘Now, comrades, what is the nature of this life of ours? Let us face it: our lives are miserable, laborious, and short. We are born, we are given just so much food as will keep the breath in our bodies, and those of us who are capable of it are forced to work to the last atom of our strength; and the very instant that our usefulness has come to an end we are slaughtered with hideous cruelty.

Second, the root of all of the problems comes from humans.  They are the cruel taskmaster of the lives of the animals.  They enslave the animals and use them. So, if the animals get rid of humans by rebelling, then the animals will be free. 

'Is it not crystal clear, then, comrades, that all the evils of this life of ours spring from the tyranny of human beings? Only get rid of Man, and the produce of our labour would be our own. 

Third, since man is the enemy, the animals must band together.  They must come together in unity and revolt.  Moreover, if the rebellion is successful, the animals must remember not to imitate man. 

What are some examples of Lyddie being determined in the book Lyddie in Chapters 1 to 8?

Lyddie is independent and hard-working no matter what the challenge.

To say that a person is determined means that the person does not give up.  Lyddie definitely does not give up.  She faces challenge after challenge, and never backs down.  This is how she is able to go from living on the farm on her own to working in a factory.

Lyddie’s father left the farm in order to try to make money out west.  It was devastating to their mother.  She turned in on herself, and left Lyddie to manage the farm on her own.  Lyddie became the only adult in the family.  This was a challenge that she faced head on.  A perfect example of Lyddie’s bravery and stubbornness is when a bear came into their house.

Lyddie glared straight into the bear's eyes, daring him to step forward into the cabin. (Ch. 1)

This is a girl who not even back down from a bear!  She reacted calmly and coolly to the situation, immediately ordering her mother and siblings into the loft and then staring the bear down.

Lyddie also holds her own on the family farm after her mother leaves.  Her mother simply can’t handle life, and so she goes to Lily’s uncle and leaves her and her brother Charles behind to deal with the farm.  Lyddie can handle it though.  She keeps herself and her brother alive.

The fact that it is important to Lyddie to do things by herself is evident from the conversation with her brother about asking their neighbor for help.

He should know she was not going to be beholden to the neighbors for anything so trivial as her own comfort. (Ch. 1)

Lyddie is determined to never be beholden to anyone.  She does not want to have to rely on others and insists on doing everything herself.  She takes on the family debt single-handedly, believing that it is her responsibility and not her brother’s or her mother’s.

Lyddie likes to say, “we can still hop.”  She is an optimist in some ways and a realist in others.  No matter what happens, she takes things as they come.  She works hard at the tavern, but when she gets fired she finds another job at a factory.  No matter what happens, Lyddie always keeps going.

In regards to World War I, what are the risks and benefits of neutrality and foreign intervention?

When World War I began, there was a sentiment in the United States to stay out of the war. However, as events unfolded, there were risks of neutrality as well as some benefits. The risks of staying neutral meant that Germany would continue to violate our rights as a neutral nation by sinking our ships without warning. As a neutral nation, we had a right to trade with any country. When Germany used submarines and sunk our ships without searching them and warning them, they violated our rights to trade with other countries. Staying neutral could have created additional problems for us. Germany was trying to get Mexico to attack us. By staying neutral, this attack could have become a reality. Finally, if the Central Powers had been victorious in World War I, the world would have become less safe for democracies. Non-democratic governments existed in the Central Powers. 

There were advantages of staying neutral. One would have been we would have saved many American lives and American property. Many American soldiers died in this conflict. Many Americans also made sacrifices at home to help with the war effort. They loaned the government money, grew their own food, and consumed less meat and wheat. There was a great deal of concern after the war that we entered the war to help our businesses make money. This led to strong demands for isolationism and neutrality in the 1920s and 1930s when events turned much more serious. Finally, by joining World War I with very idealist goals, such as making the world safe for democracy and making this the last war ever, there was a good chance we would have a difficult time accomplishing these idealistic goals of the long run.

The debate over whether we should join World War I was a serious one. There were advantages and disadvantages to getting involved in the conflict.

Why was Reuben Smith disengaged from work and then reappointed in Anna Sewell's Black Beauty?

At the beginning of Part 2, Chapter 25 of Anna Sewell's Black Beauty, the title character, who is the narrator and protagonist, explains the story of Reuben Smith.

Reuben Smith was a groom at Earlshall. Black Beauty describes him as being an excellent groom; he was kind, gentle, and even as knowledgeable in horse care as a veterinarian. Yet, Smith also had a problem with alcoholism. Black Beauty explains that he wasn't constantly a drunkard like most alcoholics, but instead, after weeks or months of soberness, he would "have a 'bout' of it ... and be a disgrace to himself, a terror to his wife, and a nuisance to all that had to do with him." It was while he was drunk that he became hazardous to the horses. Since he was such a good groom and his drunken bouts happened relatively infrequently, York, the head coachman, was willing to keep him on and keep his ailment a secret from the earl. However, one night Smith was so drunk he was unable to drive a group of ladies and gentlemen home from a party, and a "gentleman of the party had to mount the box and drive the ladies home" himself. York was unable to keep this particularly unfortunate incident a secret from the earl, and the earl promptly fired Smith.

However, Black Beauty further explains that just before he and Ginger were sold to the earl, Smith was forgiven and hired again. The earl was a "very kind-hearted" person, and York, still convinced of Smith's general goodness of character and of his excellent abilities as a groom, was able to convince the earl to forgive Smith and rehire him, so long as Smith promised "he would never taste another drop" (Ch. 25).

However, sadly, when York leaves for London and is replaced by Smith, Smith missteps and again gets drunk. This time, his drunken bout causes an accident that leads to the death of himself and the ruination of Black Beauty's knees.

What is meant by the line, "And the continuance of their parents' rage"?

The prologue of Romeo and Juliet not only sets the scene for what the audience is about to see, but also predicts the doomed ending of both Romeo and Juliet.  Thus, from the outset, we know that Romeo and Juliet will die at the end.

The line you referred to is part of a larger set of lines:

The fearful passage of their death-marked love

And the continuance of their parents' rage,

Which, but their children’s end, naught could remove,

Is now the two hours' traffic of our stage (Prologue, lines 9-12)

Essentially, the lines say that for the next two hours (the approximate length of the play) we will learn about the story of Romeo and Juliet's love and of their parents' anger.  The 'continuance of their parents' rage' refers to that anger, an anger that has continued through a long-standing feud.  The next line tells us that "naught could remove" the anger except "their children's end."  In other words, only something as horrific as their children's deaths could stop the anger and and the feuding.

In To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, what is the first thing Scout finds in the knot-hole of the oak tree?

There were two large, old oak trees in the Radley's yard.  One tree had a knot-hole in it.  One day, Scout was walking by when a glimmer of light caught her eye.  It was a piece of tin foil in the knot-hole.  She reached into the knot-hole, and "withdrew two pieces of chewing gum minus their outer wrappers" (To Kill a Mockingbird, Chapter 4).  The gum was Wrigley's Double Mint.  Scout smelled and licked the gum to make sure it was not poisoned.  When she suffered from no adverse effects, she eventually stuffed the sticks into her mouth to chew.  When Scout told Jem what she had found and how she had chewed the gum, he demanded that she spit it out.  He was concerned about her eating gum she had found in the knot-hole.  She refused to spit out the gum.  They argued back and forth until Scout eventually gave in.  She spit out the gum, which had mostly lost its flavor.

I don't understand how to solve the problem, it goes likes this: sin-1(2/3). When I input this on the calculator, I get 41.8103149. But I submit...

You are asked to find the inverse sine of 2/3 (or `sin^(-1)(2/3) ` ), also called the arcsin.

There are a couple of things you need to know to answer correctly on a computer:

(1) Your answer is correct if the answer is supposed to be in degrees.

(a) Check if your answer is supposed to be in radians. If so, change the mode of your calculator to radian mode to get `sin^(-1)(2/3)~~0.7297276562 `

(b) If the answer was supposed to be in degrees, check the instructions for the degree of accuracy. If you are supposed to answer to the nearest degree the answer is 42 degrees; to the nearest tenth of a degree it should be 41.8 degrees, etc...

(2) If the answer is supposed to be in radians, you need to check to see the precision of the answer. Usually this is to 4 decimal places, so the answer would be 0.7297 radians. (The program might insist that the leading zero is there, or might not want the leading zero -- you will want to check the instructions.)

What is a critical analysis of "Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night" by Dylan Thomas ?

An original poet of great power and beauty, Dylan Thomas writes to his dying father, "Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night," a poem constructed in the form of a villanelle. This personal message is deeply personal and filled with a violence of imagery and emotion.

Interestingly, the villanella and villancico were originally Spanish and Italian dance songs that celebrated life. So, there is the suggestiveness of the enjoyment of life all the way to the end even in the poetic form that Thomas has chosen, as well as in the content. This villanelle has the traditional form of 19 lines which consist of 5 tercets followed by a quatrain. There are 2 refrains that are accompanied by 2 repeating lines. The first and third lines of the first tercet are alternately repeated throughout the poem until the last stanza. This stanza concludes the poem by repeated both the first and third lines. (Thus, one can imagine how this form was once a dance song.)

Thomas's verses are indeed powerful as he constructs a moving and strident plea to his father to affirm life until the very end rather than to submit passively to death. In the second tercet, Thomas explains that the good deeds that he and others have done might show to better advantage if more men were to "rage against the dying of the night" because their words might have "forked...lightning." 

This plea to rage against death affirms Thomas's major theme of the continuing process of life and death and new life that links the generations to each other. He rails against those whose minds are closed to this idea in his metaphoric expressions of "the dying of the light" and "blinding sight." For instance, in the fifth stanza, with his typical violent imagery, Thomas writes:

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay....

Dylan Thomas's carefully crafted poem, whose rhyme scheme is constructed around the two contrasting words, "night" and "day," also provides several contrasting images, such as "blind" and "blaze," "curse" and "bless." This use of contrasts contributes greatly to the intensity of meaning and highly personal tone of very emotional poem. "Do Not Go Gentle into That Good Night" is, indeed, a powerful and intense work of art.

What does the poet imply when he urges one to "fill the unforgiving minute/ With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run?"

Time is a limited or finite resource. One minute comprises sixty seconds only; never more or never less. It’s “unforgiving” because once you’ve lost it, you’ve lost it forever. No matter how much you repent or fume at it, the lost moment would never return. Time moves on relentlessly, unsparingly.

Thus, the poet urges one to “fill the unforgiving minute / With sixty seconds’ worth of distance run.” This implies one must make the optimum use of the time available at hand. One must not take time for granted and become slack and negligent. Instead, one must regard time as one’s most valuable asset.

Even though we know a passed moment can’t be retrieved, yet we often trifle away time, spending it injudiciously. Quite often we simply waste it in frivolous activities or use it ineffectively. The poet urges us to value time, and utilize every minute of it in a way that we are able to make the most of it. This  is what's implied in the quoted lines. 

In The Importance of Being Earnest, identify uses of hyperbole.

Hyperbole is a type of figurative language that uses exaggeration for emphasis or humor. Much of the humor in Oscar Wilde's The Importance of Being Earnest is either hyperbole, understatement, or irony. One way Wilde uses hyperbole as part of his satire is to make trivial things seem more important than they are. Here are some humorous uses of hyperbole from the play.

• When Lady Bracknell asks Jack if he smokes, he says he does, and she replies, "I am glad to hear it. A man should always have an occupation of some kind." To refer to smoking as an occupation is hyperbole.


• Lady Bracknell states, "Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone." To praise ignorance in this way is a ridiculous exaggeration.


• Lady Bracknell scolds Jack about his upbringing, saying that to be born or bred in a handbag "reminds one of the worst excesses of the French Revolution." This takes a case of a single person's birth which happens to not meet her approval and compares it to a revolution that toppled a monarchy.


• Dr. Chasuble praises Miss Prism by saying, "Were I fortunate enough to be Miss Prism's pupil, I would hang upon her lips." This is, of course, an impossible exaggeration and one that creates a humorous mental image.    


• Algernon states that good looks "are a snare that every sensible man would like to be caught in." Of course, no sensible man really wants to be caught in a snare, so this is an exaggeration.


• During the "tea wars," Gwendolyn tells Cecily that she, Gwendolyn, is "known for the gentleness of my disposition, and the extraordinary sweetness of my nature." She is significantly exaggerating her good character traits.      


• When Jack must tell Gwendolyn the truth about his name, he states, "It is very painful for me to be forced to speak the truth. It is the first time in my life I have ever been reduced to such a painful position, and I am really quite inexperienced in doing anything of the kind." He exaggerates his lack of relationship with the truth.


• When Algernon tells Lady Bracknell that Bunbury died after "the doctors found out that he could not live," Lady Bracknell states, "He seems to have had great confidence in the opinion of his physicians." That a man could die immediately because his physician said he could not live is a humorous exaggeration.


• Lady Bracknell tells Cecily that "style largely depends on the way the chin is worn." This exaggerates the importance of how women hold their heads.


• Lady Bracknell calls it "grotesque and irreligious" that the men want to be baptized so they can change their names. It is rather absurd, but "grotesque" is taking it too far.


• After Gwendolyn states that she never changes, "except in my affections," Jack responds by saying she has a "noble nature," which is an exaggeration of what her comment indicated about her.


• The play ends with Jack stating he now recognizes "the vital Importance of Being Earnest." It is fitting that a play filled with irony and hyperbole should go out reiterating the overblown importance of one of the trivialities emphasized in the play.                                                                                                                               

In the book Night by Elie Weisel, why did the citizens resisit the truth, even when it was in front of them?

The Jews of Sighet were well aware of some of the atrocities being committed by the Nazis against their community in different regions. However, this awareness was dulled down by their false sense of security and blind optimism. In addition, news from their radios filled them with hope that the opposing army will rescue them.

And so we, the Jews of Sighet, waited for better days that surely were soon to come.

"The Red Army is advancing with giant strides…Hitler will not be able to harm us, even if he wants to…"

The Jews were comfortable in Sighet, and they were not willing to relinquish what they had worked hard for over the years, to start over again in a foreign land. The option to relocate to Palestine was not really an option for most of them.

"I am too old, my son," he answered. "Too old to start a new life. Too old to start from scratch in some distant land…"

They cited geographical and strategic reasons that would prevent the Nazis from reaching Sighet. When the Gestapo arrived in Sighet, the people remained optimistic that they would only be exposed to lighter effects of war such as labor camps. They did not realize that this was not an ordinary war, and Hitler was bent on carrying out the “final solution” regardless of the negative sentiments. For the Jews of Sighet, the war would pass, and they would go back to living their lives, but this was not to be.

Yes, we even doubted his resolve to exterminate us.

Annihilate an entire people? Wipe out a population dispersed throughout so many nations? So many millions of people! By what means? In the middle of the twentieth century!

My teacher told me that pits are areas in a plant cell where there is no secondary cell wall. Is this true for all types of plant cells and all...

Your teacher is correct. Secondary cell walls make the cell walls more resistant to degradation, but are less flexible and decrease the amount of water permeability. Pits are openings (holes if you prefer) in the secondary wall that are used for cellular transportation. They are also responsible for allowing cell to cell communication by letting the plasmodesmata connect to other cells through the secondary wall.

So, if a plant cell has pits, it has a secondary cell wall, because pits are openings in this specific wall. As we will see, not all plant cells have secondary walls!

Secondary walls are only present in cells in which it develops. An example of a plant cell type without a secondary cell wall (thus without pits) is the parenchyma, one of the main types of plant tissue.

Lacking the secondary wall, parenchyma cells are known to be more flexible, as they are thinner.

I hope I gave you the proper definition you were looking for, and was able to give you a clear understanding of which plant cell types contain pits!