In Animal Farm, how do the pigs become what they hated?

This question gets to the heart of one of the paradoxes of the story.  At the urging of Old Major, the animals rebel in a desire to seek freedom, but what they create is another form of servitude. At the head of all of this are the pigs. 

At the beginning of the story, the pigs are sincere.  We can see this in the commandments of animalism.  The laws are fair and treat everyone as equal, but as the story progresses, the pigs, who emerge as leaders, begin to change.  The text does not tell us why they changed, but we can see one key reason. 

Lord Acton's words are appropriate, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." When the pigs experience the seductive allure of power they cannot resist.  In the beginning it is small; they steal the apples, but later they rule with an iron fist. They understand what the humans understand, the corrupting power of power. This is why the pigs make all the animals serve them. The most graphic and emotive example of this is what they did to Boxer, the most faithful worker on the farm.  When he could not work any longer, they sold him to the knackers to profit from his body being turned into glue. 

In conclusion, the corruption started small, but once it started, it accelerated and completely transformed the pigs into the very ones they hated. Absolute power did corrupt absolutely. 

In what movie are the characters similar to Gatsby in thinking that their significant others are not as great as they had originally thought?...

The movie that comes most instantly to my mind is (500) Days of Summer. This movie, which is told in a nonlinear narrative style, explores the relationship between Tom (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), a hopeless romantic, and Summer (Zooey Deschanel), who claims to not believe in love. The movie explores both the budding of the relationship and its ending with a series of scenes that do not follow chronological structure (the movie starts on Day 488 and then jumps back to Day 1). This structure allows the viewer to see the relationship from Tom's point-of-view and how his memories of their good times clouds his judgment about the relationship itself. 

In fact, Tom's precocious little sister Rachel (Chloe Grace Moretz) tells Tom that maybe the relationship wasn't as great as he remembers:

"Look, I know you think she was the one, but I don't. Now, I think you're just remembering the good stuff. Next time you look back, uh, I really think you should again."

One big difference between the women is that while Daisy turns out to be a horrible person in the book and seems to not really care about Gatsby's death, Summer at least wants Tom to be happy. 

In "By the Waters of Babylon," who is John and why does he set out on a journey?

John is the protagonist of Stephen Vincent Benét's "By the Waters of Babylon." As the son of a priest, John has a chance of being a priest, too. Priests have a lot of responsibility in John's tribe, which is west of the Place of the Gods. Going east to the Place of the Gods is not allowed, and, John claims, has "been forbidden since the beginning of time." 

Due to John's dreams and his ability to do the spells he is taught by his father and other priests, he is told he will be initiated as a priest. Before his initiation, John must go on a journey of discovery. At the beginning of his journey, John fasts and waits for a sign about where he is supposed to go on his journey. John sees an eagle flying east and takes that as a sign that he ought to journey to the Place of the Gods, even though it is forbidden. His journey to the Place of the Gods, which turns out to be an abandoned New York City, has a significant effect on John and the rest of his tribe.

What are gravitational waves?

Gravitational waves are ripples in the fabric of space-time according to Einstein's Theory of Relativity.  They are theorized to originate from a source, then flow outward from the source in the form of ripples.  As waves, they are capable of transmitting energy in the form of radiation.  Sources of this type of wave are binary systems, black holes, and neutron stars.  The mass contained in these types of objects are much more massive than objects here on earth.  According to Einstein's general theory of relativity, the generation of gravitational waves is an occurrence upon which the curving of space-time is dependent.  This curving effect is dependent upon the amount of mass in an object.  The more massive the object, the greater the curving of space-time.  This directly affects the amount of gravity generated by the object.  As these massive objects move around within the structure of the universe, they generate accelerations in the curvature of space-time.  These generations of accelerations occur at the speed of light and are known as gravitational waves.

Gravitational waves from the beginning of time in the news:

"Gravity Waves from Big Bang Detected," March 2014

"Has giant LIGO experiment seen gravitational waves?" September 2015

"Scientists struggle to stay grounded after possible gravitational
wave signal," January 2016

In Empire Falls by Richard Russo, what are some prominent quotes about the misguided relationships of the characters?

In Richard Russo’s Empire Falls, there are many misguided relationships between characters. One of the most telling moments is when Miles says to Janine, “You sure are tough on [Tick] lately,” and then regrets saying it. He thinks, “One of the great mysteries of marriage was that you had to actually say things before you realized they were wrong” (109). Then he thinks, "The other possibility was that there was no right thing to say, that the choice wasn't between right and wrong but between wrong, more wrong, and as wrong as you can get” (109). Both of these quotations reveal that Miles is uncertain about his relationship and that the things he levies as true or right to say are sometimes not—and there’s no way of knowing until the words are out.

In Wolf Hall, how does Cromwell's character develop throughout the novel? Do his values change?

Cromwell’s character development is quite subtle throughout Wolf Hall; he seems a fully mature and wise counselor from the very start of the novel. He feels mercy for the disgraced Katherine of Aragon and her plight; at the end, as he reflects on Thomas More’s execution, Cromwell expresses the same desire to be merciful to his enemy. He loves his family and sons and sees himself as a surrogate father to many young men throughout the novel. However, Cromwell experiences personal tragedy as well as professional advancement and political turmoil and sees the fruition of his vision for an England governed by a monarch rather than the Church. These experiences do have an effect on him and by the end of the novel when he reflects on Thomas More’s trial and execution, he is sadder and more cynical, thinking of Petrarch’s lines on the passage of time as a race of dying men and of the ways in which the living pursue the dead by appropriating their legacies and repurposing them into their own visions. Cromwell is less optimistic about the future of England about which he “once had every hope.” While at one time, he naively believed that the King would never do anything to hurt his Queen, he has now internalized the pragmatism that he once merely observed with his mentor Wolsey: that “all outcomes are likely, all outcomes can be managed, even massaged into desirability…” Yet Cromwell also thinks of maps and how England herself shifts, her boundaries as well as her memories. Cromwell is aware that he is living during a time of great change and by looking ahead to Wolf Hall, he resolves to be a part of this change, no matter what the costs.

Robert Frost's biographer describes him as a man of contradictions. On the one hand he was an individualist who wanted to do things his way; on...

In one sense, the biographer's statement is a sort of cliché that every biographer succumbs to when building a complex portrait of his/her subject. It is a device meant to fend off any criticism from readers who find incidents in the subject's life that contradict the author's main view.  If I said "Einstein was an intelligent man" someone would  point out that several of his life choices were unwise, so I say "Einstein was a man of contradictions."

  In this particular case, however, the poem itself is about choice, and about the contradictions that are built into any decision.  If the biographer feels that somewhere in his career Frost "chose the path" of "fitting in" or the choice of "doing things his own way," then the poem could be seen as his statement about his doubts or ponderings about what would have been if he had made the other choice.  The analogy breaks down once  one path is chosen over the other, since the biographer is saying that Frost somehow "walked" both paths.

What did Marshall mean by the phrase "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is"?

In the Marbury v. Madison Supreme Court Case, the concept of judicial review was firmly established.  Judicial review is the idea that the courts can rule a law that has been passed by a legislative body as invalid.  This ruling is made on the basis of Constitutional law.  In other words, if a law is passed that violates the Constitutional rights of citizens, it can be overruled by the courts.  The Supreme Court has the authority to ultimately make this decision.  

The concept of judicial review is often criticized by political analysts as "ruling from the bench" or in giving the judicial branch too much authority.  The statement of Chief Justice John Marshall that is referenced in the statement above seems to confirm these fears.  What Marshall meant is that when two laws seem to contradict one another, it is the duty and responsibility of the courts to decide which law should be valid.  This is especially true if the law in question is in contradiction to the United States Constitution.  

What evidence is there throughout the novel To Kill a Mockingbird that proves Jem had faith in Maycomb's community members and its justice system?

Throughout the novel, Jem is confident that Maycomb's citizens are respectable, magnanimous individuals with integrity. In the mind of a child, citizens who portray these positive qualities would value justice. The overwhelming lack of evidence, conflicting testimonies, and Tom's handicap is more than enough to acquit Tom Robinson. Towards the end of the trial, Jem mentions to Reverend Sykes that they will win the case. Jem is naive and doesn't take into consideration the role that prejudice plays in the jury's decision. Jem says,

"We've won it...Don't see how any jury could convict on what we heard---" (Lee 279)

After her the "guilty" verdict, Jem is overwhelmed with grief and anger. The following day, the children go over to Miss Maudie's for cakes. Maudie tells Jem not to fret, and Jem makes the comment,

"I always thought Maycomb folks were the best folks in the world, least that's what they seemed like." (Lee 288)

Jem's comment is evidence that he once had faith in the citizens of Maycomb. He also mentions to Scout later on in Chapter 23, that he used to think there was only one type of person in Maycomb because everyone seemed to get along and treat each other with respect. He says,

"That's what I thought, too...when I was your age. If there's just one kind of folks, why can't they get along with each other?" (Lee 304)

Who recognizes Romeo's voice beneath his mask in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet?

The answer to this question can be found in Act I, Scene 5 of Romeo and Juliet. It is Tybalt, Juliet's hot-blooded cousin, that recognizes Romeo's voice (his face is hidden by a mask, like the other partygoers at the Capulet family ball). When Tybalt realizes that the voice behind the mask belongs to Romeo, a Montague, he flies into a rage, and orders his servant to bring him a rapier so that he can kill him. Only Lord Capulet, who does not want to cause a scene at his own party, stops him from challenging Romeo to a duel. Tybalt, after being chastised by Capulet, reluctantly agrees to withdraw, but adds ominously that "this intrusion shall / Now seeming sweet, convert to bitt'rest gall." This is an important moment in the play, as Tybalt's rage will prove to be a force that destroys Romeo and Juliet's marriage. He challenges Romeo to a duel which Mercutio, Romeo's good friend, takes up. When Mercutio dies at Tybalt's hands, Romeo kills him, an act which sees him banished to Mantua. Thus Tybalt's hatred, which first rears its head at the Capulet family ball, contributes to the destruction of Romeo and Juliet.

How does Poe create suspense in the story "The Cask of Amontillado"?

Edgar Allan Poe creates suspense in "The Cask of Amontillado" through the physical journey taken by the central characters, his eerie symbolism, and his references to sickness. These elements work together to let the reader know that Fortunato will die before the story is over.

First, the journey that Fortunato and Montresor take is from the light and joy of a carnival through an underground tunnel that becomes darker, colder and more poisonous as they continue walking. Poe describes their descent into a "deep crypt, in which the foulness of the air caused our flambeaux rather to glow than flame," and talks about the nitre in the air around them as they go deeper underground and Fortunato comes closer to death. This slow, dangerous descent helps build suspense as the reader becomes increasingly aware of Fortunato's murderous plan.

Similarly, Poe includes many symbols of death that become increasingly more macabre as the story continues. At the beginning of their journey together, Montresor draws a "mask of black silk" around him, as if he were on his way to a funeral. Next, Poe mentions the "damp ground of the catacombs," which are a more obvious symbol of death. Eventually, Poe launches into a vivid description of the piles of human remains which line the walls of the crypt into which they enter. At this point, the morbidity of the symbolism is clear, and this symbolism has helped to create suspense.

Finally, Poe also builds suspense through Montresor's constant references to Fortunato's sickness and impending death. At first, Montresor pretends to be concerned about Fortunato's cold and cough. Fortunato's response is that he "shall not die of a cough," an answer that seems trite but foreshadows a grim end. Finally, as the nitre begins to have a serious effect on Fortunato, Montresor talks freely about the way the "drops of moisture trickle among the bones." This disgusting response reminds us that they are entering a crypt whose air contains a dangerous chemical on their way to Fortunato's murder.

Because of Poe's skill with words, he was able to create suspense through the construction of a physical journey, the use of macabre symbolism and several references to sickness and death. These elements help keep the reader frightened, intrigued and engaged as the story moves toward its horrible end.

How does Jem’s perception of Boo Radley change over the first seven chapters of To Kill a Mockingbird?

Jem's curiosity regarding Boo Radley increases and leads to increasingly bold actions. As you may remember, Jem and Scout are initially quite frightened of Boo Radley and the Radley house. They make sure they walk extra fast when passing the house. However, especially from chapter 4 onward you start to see a change in Jem's behavior, which is spurred on in part by Dill's enthusiasm and by the fact that Jem is getting older and thinks he must be braver in his behavior. Instead of being frightened of Boo, he decides he wants to meet him. In chapter 4 the kids start playing a game called Boo Radley, which shows their increasing fascination with the mystery surrounding the Radleys. In chapter 5 Jem and Dill try to leave a note for Boo, inviting him out for ice cream. Atticus accuses the boys of tormenting Boo and tells them to leave Boo alone. Jem disobeys, however, and in chapter 6 he sneaks towards the Radley house to peek through the shutters, but gets scared when a shotgun is fired. What these actions show is that for Jem, Boo Radley is changing from a frightful monster into a fascinating person who Jem wants to meet. 

In Frindle, what are Ms. Granger's internal characteristics?

In Andrew Clements' novel Frindle, Ms. Granger is the main antagonist. She has a reputation for being a tough teacher who demands the best from her students. Though she may be demanding, this does not stem from any cruelty towards her students, but rather high expectations and a deep love and appreciation for the language she teaches. In fact, one of Ms. Grangers additional internal traits is her sense of humor. Her intelligence is highlighted near the end of Frindle when it is revealed that not only did she understand what was going on with Nick Allen's word invention, but helped it along by challenging Nick which gave him and his friends the push to keep the word frindle in use. When, years later, she gives him a copy of the dictionary with frindle printed in it, it also shows that she cares about her students and is proud of what they can accomplish. 

Identify three examples of "mockingbirds" in the novel To Kill a Mockingbird and explain why.

The concept of a mockingbird as a creature who is innocent and does not bother anyone else and who holds no malice toward others. "To kill a mockingbird" holds the connotation of to destroy the innocence of this creature by harming it. Three mockingbirds--innocents who are harmed by gratuitous cruelty--are Boo Radley, Tom Robinson, and Dill Harris.

• Boo Radley

As a youth Boo became involved in some vandalism and other teen-aged pranks for which his father imprisoned him. Then, because of his forced reclusion, tall tales have been fabricated about him; He eats raw squirrels, he has blood-stained hands and a long jagged scar, he poisons pecans, and stares in windows at night, etc.; in short, he is vilified and made to seem ghoulish.

After Boo saves Jem, Heck Tate recognizes that Boo has been too sheltered all these years and would not be able to handle the notoriety of having been the one who has saved the Finch children's lives. This is why he urges Atticus to agree to the account of Bob Ewell's falling upon his own knife.

• Tom Robinson

Tom Robinson is an innocent man whose kindness becomes his undoing as he falls victim to the cruel Bob Ewell. For, Mayella is forced by her father to accuse Tom of rape when she is caught hugging Tom after falsely luring him into her house where he innocently has gone in order to help her break apart an old chiffarobe.
Knowing that he is a scapegoat of white society after a jury convicts him of a crime that all evidence proves he did not do, Tom tries to flee, and is shot and killed.

• Charles Baker Harris (Dill)

Living mainly in a make-believe world of his own creation, Dill is an innocent boy who, when exposed to the cruel biases of Mr. Gilmer as he questions Tom Robinson on the witness stand, is overcome with fear and emotion. When he breaks down and cries, Scout takes him outside. There Mr. Dolphus Raymond hears Dill, and he offers him some of his Coca-Cola that the townspeople have mistaken for alcohol. Mr. Raymond notices Dill's innocence of how "colored folks" are treated, and he says,

“Things haven’t caught up with that one’s instinct yet. Let him get a little older and he won’t get sick and cry. Maybe things’ll strike him as being—not quite right, say, but he won’t cry [about the "hell white people give colored folks] not he gets a few years on him.”

Dill has received a shock to his innocence when he realizes how blacks are really treated by some of the town. After this experience, Dill becomes cynical.

Why did the British policy of alliances at the turn of 20th century become more appropriate to face the german challenge?

At the turn of the century, the British alliance system was very helpful in dealing with the growing threat from Germany. Germany, Italy and Austria-Hungary had formed an alliance called the Triple Alliance. These countries wanted to gain more land beyond their borders. Germany and Italy had become unified nations in 1870. By then, most lands were already colonized. The way Germany and Italy could get their own colonies would be mostly likely by going to war. Additionally, Germany and Italy were building up their militaries. Also, a wave of nationalism was sweeping over those countries. These countries were beginning to believe they couldn’t be defeated in a war. As a result, it made sense for Britain to strengthen its alliances.

The British and French became friends after nearly a century of being enemies. Russia was also brought into this alliance that became known as the Triple Entente. Great Britain now had strong countries to help them in the case of attack by Germany or Italy. Worldwide events encouraged Great Britain to strengthen its alliances by the early 1900s.

In The Book Thief by Markus Zusak, what color was the sky and what did it represent?

The narrator, Death, is an interesting fellow. Many times when he is about to pick up a soul, he describes what the sky looks like at that exact moment in time. Since Death picks up many different souls during the course of the story, he describes many different scenes; therefore, each death scene has a different color or description associated with it. For example, Death's first description of the sky at a scene of a bombing is as follows:

"The last time I saw her was red. The sky was like soup, boiling and stirring. In some places, it was burned. There were black crumbs, and pepper, streaked across the redness" (12).

The above passage mentions the color red, twice. Other words associated with this scene of air-raid bombings are boiling, stirring, burned, pepper, and streaks. These images also make one think of fire, flack, and debris. Other than the redness, there are no other colors mentioned explicitly, but they all mean "death."

Another time the Narrator describes the sky is at Johan Hermann's death, as follows:

"Oh, yes, I definitely remember him. The sky was murky and deep like quicksand. There was a young man parceled up on barbed wire, like a giant crown of thorns. I untangled him and carried him out" (145).

In this passage, there aren't any specific colors mentioned, but the word "quicksand" suggests a particular image that might carry with it a dark, blackish hue--or any color which one associates with it. On cue, though, Death describes the sky again as if it were the victim's last sight he witnessed before he died.

Below is one last example of Death describing the sky as he is collecting Jewish souls:

"Summer came. For the book thief, everything was going nicely. For me, the sky was the color of Jews . . . All of them were light, like the cases of empty walnuts. Smoky sky in those places. The smell like a stove, but still so cold" (349).

This description brings up Death's experience during the first day that Auschwitz (concentration camp) started burning bodies. The color of smoke can be many shades of black and white and gray. This must be what he saw when collecting these souls. The profound contrasting images of a hot stove also being cold drives home the senselessness of these innocent people's deaths--as if he is shocked to witness the coldness behind the Nazis indifference to murder. 

How would you explain Coleridge's take on metaphysics in Chapter 12? Does he believe in a simple outlook based on the idea that what we see is real...

Coleridge does make a distinction between philosophers and everybody else. He says that not everyone can be or needs to be a philosopher, but philosophers do attempt to understand things differently. He says that the philosophic consciousness lies "behind the spontaneous consciousness natural to all reflecting beings." In other words, the philosopher goes deeper than the immediate perception of things. So, to most people, what we see is real, immediate, and understandable. For the philosopher, interested in the metaphysical and the transcendent, the outlook is not as simple. 

Coleridge also says that philosophy "is employed on objects of the inner SENSE, and cannot, like geometry, appropriate to every construction a correspondent outward intuition." The inner sense can not be dictated by the outward object. So, the philosopher/metaphysician must go more abstract, to the IDEA of what we see in the external world. In this way, Coleridge is giving a Romantic or Transcendentalist version of Platonic notions of Ideal Forms and ideas. 

Coleridge does explain that the knowledge of a thing does arise from the interaction of subject (consciousness) and object. So, there is a simplicity to the idea of this subject/object interaction. But there is definitely another process of understanding that the metaphysician undertakes, and this makes the interaction a bit more complex. We might call this "apperception" wherein the subject (or "self-conscious spirit") gets more into the idea of self-consciousness as a process or act of will which thinks beyond the simplicity of the subject/object interaction: 

Again the spirit (originally the identity of object and subject) must in some sense dissolve this identity, in order to be conscious of it; fit alter et idem.

How did slavery affect Africa socially, economically and politically?

Between the fifteenth and nineteenth centuries, an estimated 12 million Africans were enslaved and transported across the Atlantic Ocean. Socially, this process had a dramatic impact on Africa's population because it removed a huge number of men and women. By 1850, for example, the population of Africa was 25 million people but historians believe that it would have been double this number, had slavery not taken place. 

For those left behind, slavery had important economic consequences too. Because so many able-bodied men and women were transported abroad, Africa did not have enough workers and entrepreneurs to bring about an agrarian revolution and, in the longer-term, to industrialise. A number of Africans turned instead to working in the lucrative slave-trade and this created important political consequences because traders found it harder to enslave people during peace time. Slave traders, therefore, created political rifts and conflicts to ensure a steady supply of prisoners of war who could be sold into slavery. In Ghana, for example, the rise of slavery coincided with the introduction of gunpowder and explosives to the country. 

What is the meaning of the songs in The Pearl?

The Songs in The Pearl are all part of the Song of Life. They are a reflection of the native beliefs that the people of Mexico once had before the coming of the Europeans. They are for all aspects of life: The Family, Evil, the Enemy, What Might Be, the Undersea. All these are parts of Kino’s life. Thus Kino refers to the song as “the Whole,” meaning all of life. He and Juana sing these songs when an occasion arises that needs an expression of emotion. In the good times and the bad times, either Kino or Juana breaks into song. When Coyotito is stung by the scorpion, Juana sings the song of the family, to protect her child against evil. Kino sings when the priest comes and wants to be part of the pearl and its wealth. After Kino throws the pearl into the sea, it is stated that the music of the pearl softens into a whisper and then disappears.

In The Giver, how do they get rid of color?

We are never told exactly how they got rid of color, but it has something to do with science, as the Giver references this when talking about the color of flesh. 

In Ch. 12 Jonas is learning about color for the first time and this is when the Giver explains to him that things used to all have different shapes and colors. They talk about Fiona's red hair, the apple Jonas saw, and the color of faces. 

The Giver then chuckles and says,

"We've never completely mastered Sameness. I suppose the genetic scientists are still hard at work trying to work the kinks out. Hair like Fiona's must drive them crazy."

Then Jonas asks him about why they got rid of colors and this is the last we hear about the how - sort of. The Giver tells Jonas that the community got rid of color at the same time they got rid of sunshine, and then says, almost cryptically,

"We gained control of many things. But we had to let go of others."

So, we do not exactly know how colors were done away with, but we do know it has something to do with science, and that the scientists are still constantly perfecting Sameness.

What archetype does Penelope represent?

As the name indicates, archetypes are ideal forms of a particular type or motif. In the Odyssey, Penelope is the archetype of the "faithful wife." She waits twenty years for Odysseus, her husband, to return home to Ithaca.Ten of these years comprised the Trojan War; he was away from home, but she knew via correspondence that he was alive and planned to return.

However, during his "odyssey" to return home, she did not know whether he was alive or dead. Her house began to fill with suitors who desired to marry her, 108 in all. They began to pressure her to choose a husband, but she tricked them for several years, delaying their advances. She remained faithful even to the end, and her faithfulness was rewarded by the safe return of her husband.

In Night, why does Elie have to go to the hospital?

By Chapter 5 of Night, Elie's foot, which begins simply swollen, is infected.  After consulting with the doctor, Elie is told that he needs an operation; without it, his foot will likely need to be amputated.  Elie goes to the concentration camp hospital.  On the bright side, there are better rations of food there.  On the other, there are also more frequent selections, and Elie fears that he will be selected without the opportunity to reunite with his father.

When Elie hears a rumor that the Russian army is close by and that the Germans intend to kill everyone in the hospital before surrendering, Elie sneaks out of the hospital and proceeds to meet up with his dad.  He feels that he has made the right move, although he finds out later that those who remained in the hospital were simply liberated several days later.

What is the setting of Seedfolks?

Paul Fleischman’s wonderful young adult novella takes place in Cleveland, Ohio.  I couldn’t remember if an actual date is ever given in the novella, so I did a little research and still couldn’t find a date for the setting. The book is published in 1997, so that gives us a clue that it is, perhaps, set in recent times. If I had to make an educated guess, I would put the setting in the 1980’s when the inner cities of most of the major cities in the United States were in drastic states of decay.  The building of housing projects started by the Department of Housing of Urban Development (HUD) in 1965 had run its course in its ability to keep up with the demand of housing for the poor in the inner city. The housing projects quickly started to deteriorate, as there was little money for upkeep and few jobs for those in the inner city to obtain.  Crime and drug abuse became rampant in the projects, and people had very little hope or money to get up and out of their impoverished situations.

 Although the novel is set in Cleveland, it represents many urban areas around the country.  The novel takes place in an urban area on Gibb St. where a vacant lot exists filled with trash.  The lot on Gibb St. separates different ethnic groups of the area.  Blacks, Latinos, and Asian immigrants, as well as long time elderly residents of the area, live in close proximity to each other but are segregated by cultural and ethnic differences.  It is the planting of a few lima beans in a garden by Kim, a young Vietnamese girl, that brings the community together to help make their lives and environment better. 

What happened to Benjamin Franklin in 1720?

Several important things happened in Benjamin Franklin's life in the year 1720.  He was a young man of fourteen-years-old in 1720.  One thing was that he left his family's home to live in a boarding house.  It was also during this year that Ben Franklin stopped attending church regularly.  He did this so that he would have additional study time.  This was somewhat unusual for the time.  In the 1700s, Colonists typically attended church on Sundays.  Eventually Franklin became a Deist, influenced by reading the books in his father's library as a boy.

His father, Josiah Franklin, was chosen as a "town scavenger for 1721" in 1720.  His brother, James Franklin, started publishing The New England Courant.  Some believe that this could have occurred in 1720.  Ben Franklin later wrote letters which were published in the paper, which was the beginning of his literary endeavors.

In act 4 of Julius Caesar, who dies and how do they die?

Act IV begins with Antony and Octavian, along with Lepidus, listing the names of those conspirators and alleged conspirators who might be problematic for them in the future. They say that Publius and Lepidus's brother must die. But we do not learn of their murder in this act. The one character who dies in this Act (albeit offstage) is Portia, Brutus's wife. Brutus announces her death to Cassius after their dispute in Act IV Scene 3. She has died, according to Brutus, by "swallowing fire," a horrific means of committing suicide. Brutus says, in effect, that she has killed herself because she was "impatient of my absence" and fearing the worst as Antony and Octavian appeared to be gaining in power in Rome. She may have believed that she would be killed as the wife of the chief conspirator against Caesar, and wished to avoid such an ignominious end. 

Based on your knowledge of Wilson’s war message to Congress, do you agree that the United States had a moral and humanitarian obligation to...

In April 1917, Wilson asked Congress to declare war on the German empire in order to "make the world safe for democracy."  While democracies tend to be the most peaceful form of government, as people are not likely to risk their lives in war unless absolutely necessary, America did not have a moral and humanitarian reason to "make the world safe for democracy."  In April 1917, America joined the Entente side in the war as an "associated power," not an ally.  This meant that Wilson still tried to maintain the moral high ground that America was not in this war for any type of gain.  However, it is a farce to think that America was defending democracy in this war.  Britain, France, and Belgium all had extensive colonial holdings in Africa--these colonies were ruled brutally by Europeans.  Russia was still in the war in 1917 on the Entente side--Russia was an autocracy with the power of the state fully vested in Czar Nicholas II and his Romanov family.  America joined the war to protest German unrestricted submarine warfare and Germany's Zimmerman note, but America did not go to war to make the world safe for democracy.  America does not have a moral obligation to promote democracy all over the world--it is nearly impossible to force a democracy on a group of people who are not prepared to institute it.  Given what happened at the Versailles Treaty, the world was even less safe for democracy than when America entered the war in 1917.  

How does the tone and mood shift with the arrival of Aunt Alexandra in Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird?

At the end of Chapter 11 in To Kill a Mockingbird, the moment Aunt Alexandra arrives to stay for a while, author Harper Lee uses several word choices to change both the tone and the mood of the story. The word choices convey that Lee disapproves of Aunt Alexandra's rigid and judgmental viewpoints just as much as the children. The word choices also paint the children's disappointment at seeing their aunt to set the gloomy mood her arrival brings.

Lee establishes her disapproving tone and gloomy mood in the very first sentence Scout uses to describe her unexpected sighting of Aunt Alexandra:

Enarmored, upright, uncompromising, Aunt Alexandra was sitting in a rocking chair exactly as if she had sat there every day of her life. (Ch. 11)

Three very important words Lee uses in Scout's narrative description of Aunt Alexandra are "enarmored," "upright," and "uncompromising."

The word enarmored does not appear in the dictionary; however, the prefix -en can mean "to cause to be in," just like the word entomb means inside of a tomb (Random House Dictionary). Therefore, Lee is using enarmored to describe Aunt Alexandra as being inside of or covered in armor; in other words, Aunt Alexandra has a very hard, impenetrable exterior because she is a very hard, protective person, the sort of person who does not easily express affection. In addition, the word upright can be translated to mean righteous. Finally, to be uncompromising means to be unable to concede to others' views. All in all, the sentence describes Aunt Alexandra as a very cold, hard person, who is set in her ways, and difficult to please, someone the children do not really like and are disappointed to see. Hence, the words of the sentence clearly express their disappointment at seeing her and gloomy mood.

The sentence stands in stark contrast with the conversation Scout had just been having with Calpurnia on the way home from having attended Calpurnia's church. Scout had just asked Cal why she talks "nigger-talk" with the folks at her church when Cal knows it's not the proper way to use English. Cal's response is a lesson in humility. She explains that it's not always right to "tell all you know" and doing so can be offensive and will never be helpful. Lee's word choices show that Aunt Alexandra is the exact opposite of humble Cal; instead of being humble, Aunt Alexandra is proud and righteous. Since Lee has juxtapose Aunt Alexandra with Cal, we can tell that Lee disapproves of Aunt Alexandra's character and is establishing a disapproving tone.

Hence, with just this one sentence, Lee shifts from an approving tone and happy mood to a disapproving tone and gloomy mood.

What is political ideology?

A political ideology is a set of political beliefs. In other words, an ideology is a collection of ideas, usually revolving around a central assumption or belief, that people think should govern society.

Usually we compare political ideologies by putting them on a spectrum, with the left being in American politics more liberal, and the right more conservative. To give examples in an American context, "liberalism," the more left-leaning ideology in American politics, argues among other things that society ought to do more to foster equality and social justice among people. In many cases, this entails government action, as in the New Deal of the 1930s, or the Great Society of the 1960s, touchstones for modern liberalism. "Conservatism," the more right-leaning of the ideologies in American politics, argues, among other things, for more emphasis on economic freedom than on equality or justice. Typically conservatives position themselves against government regulation and attempts to create social justice and equality, arguing that they often result in unintended consequences and involve enormous expense.

These are only two relatively moderate examples of political ideology, and it should be noted that "Republican" and "Democrat" are political parties, not ideologies. Parties are aligned to particular ideologies (more at some times than at others) but are not synonymous with them. 

How did Canadian women contribute in the Second World War?

When Canada entered World War Two on September 10 1939, many of its male citizens joined the armed forces to fight the Nazis. But, with many men gone and a need to boost production, women had to fill this fill void and play an active role in the war effort. Here are some ways in which they made a vital contribution:

• At home, women enforced rationing, reduced waste and collected items which could be recycled for the war effort, e.g. metal, rubber and glass.


• Around 373,000 women worked in the manufacturing industry, of which 261,000 were employed in the production of munitions, especially aircraft and in gun plants.


• Women volunteered as nurses for the Red Cross or in the military canteens.


• Women also joined the armed forces, like the Women's Royal Canadian Naval Service, primarily as stenographers and secretaries, and the Canadian Women's Army Corps where they decoded messages.


• Women also organised home defense programs in case of invasion. Here, they wore a uniform, performed military drills and learned how to handle a weapon.

Did the princess choose the lady or the tiger?

This is an excellent opportunity to stretch your mind in three directions: First, there is no tiger, no door, no choice. Like Magritte’s painting of a pipe (called “This is not a pipe”) , it is time to distinguish between the “signified” and the “signifier” – between the actual object or physical reality, and its “symbol,” whether a word or a drawing or gesture. Man’s mind has the ability to put the world into communicable form; we have even progressed to finding signifiers for abstractions – look at the “heart” gesture “made with the hands” that you see at music concerts. We all know it means “I am loving this musical moment, and you the musician.” In the anecdotal story of the lady and the tiger, the author is using these words – lady, tiger, door – to signify the difficult and character-revealing choice the “protagonist” has to make. The fact that the author chooses not to “signify” the actual choice is because he/she wants the story to be “about the difficulty.” It’s like asking “Why does the whale not die?” in Moby Dick – that’s not what Melville was trying to articulate. Second, the art and craft of fiction-writing are complicated skills, and you, the reader, have an opportunity here to examine how you were drawn into believing, for a moment, that such an incident actually happened. We can feel the tension, even hear the breathing, as the fictional story is told. Thirdly, you can analytically compare this choice-making story with such literature as Frost’s “The Road Not Taken” or any number of tales of difficult-choice stories, and glean some psychological solace out of knowing you are not alone in your Angst when confronted with a difficult choice.

What are the literary devices used in Macbeth's dagger speech?

We can find Macbeth's famous dagger speech in Act 2 Scene I. Macbeth starts out his speech by referencing a dagger, which he sees in the confused recesses of his tortured mind. He addresses this dagger as if it were a person. We call this literary device apostrophe.

Macbeth's soliloquy typifies the conversation of a man in a heightened, psychotic state; his perceptions vacillate between reality and fantasy. Those in the late stages of psychosis often exhibit erratic patterns of speech, as does Macbeth in his soliloquy. After stating that the dagger is so real he can almost reach out and grab it, he proceeds to question whether the dagger is just a figment of his grand imagination.  He thinks he sees the dagger calling him to the place he originally intended to go, to do the things he originally intended to do. In his delusion of paranoia, he eventually decides that the dagger is sending him secret messages that only he can understand. After all, he sees 'gouts of blood' on the handle and blade that weren't there before.

Another example of apostrophe in the speech comes later when Macbeth addresses the 'sure and firm-set earth,' telling the ground not to advertise his path towards Duncan. He wants the earth to assist him in his mission by not divulging his whereabouts, in case his desired purpose is thwarted.

There are two allusions in this speech; Macbeth talks about 'Pale Hecate's offerings' and 'Tarquin's ravishing strides.' Allusions are brief and indirect references to things, people, or ideas with cultural, political, or historical significance. Hecate is a Greek goddess often associated with the underworld, ghosts, witches, and magic. The reference to 'withered murder' (here, murder is personified as a man ready to do his foul deed) moving quietly like Tarquin leads us to ponder the rape of Lucretia. As Tarquin's rape of Lucretia cost him his kingdom, so does Macbeth's eventual murder of Duncan. A fitting reference!

These allusions are part of the imagery (or mental images) utilized by Shakespeare to show us the state of Macbeth's mind as he contemplates murdering Duncan. The imagery encompasses ghosts, witches, imaginary daggers, and general evil under the cover of night, instilling dread in the reader.

What do you consider the major moral lesson in Hard Times by Charles Dickens?

For me, the major moral lesson that Charles Dickens hopes readers take away from Hard Times is that Utilitarian values are not only impractical, but are also immoral and calloused. Utilitarianism is a philosophy that was especially prominent at the time Dickens wrote the tale, and it is centered on practically and methodically calculating what does the most people the most good, while disregarding the human component of their felicitous calculus. Dickens exaggerates the tenets of Utilitarianism through iconic characters such as Mr. Gradgrind and the loathsome Bounderby.

Gradgrind specifically best represents the moral lesson that Utilitarianism is a narrow, restrictive philosophy after he grows to appreciate the human condition. Initially, Gradgrind harps on about facts and statistics, and ignores others’ thoughts and emotions. He finds his children's use of imagination to be a sign of weakness and mental deficiency. One striking instance is when his daughter Louisa asks if she should marry Bounderby, another Utilitarian caricature:

“I would advise you (since you ask me) to consider this question, as you have been accustomed to consider every other question, simply as one of tangible Fact.... You are, we will say in round numbers, twenty years of age; Mr. Bounderby is, we will say in round numbers, fifty.... In considering this question, it is not unimportant to take into account the statistics of marriage, so far as they have yet been obtained in England and Wales. I find, on reference to the figures, that a large proportion of these marriages are contracted between parties of very unequal ages, and that the elder of these contracting parties is, in rather more than three-fourths of these instances, the bridegroom.... The disparity I have mentioned, therefore, almost ceases to be disparity, and (virtually) all but disappears” (77).

Gradgrind emphasizes the facts of the potential relationship, but overlooks how his daughter actually feels toward Bounderby. He treats the marriage as a business transaction. The marriage is a bitter affair for Louisa, and she eventually leaves him a broken woman. It is only after Mr. Gradgrind witnesses the depth of his daughter’s agony that he understands that his Utilitarian values have failed. This experience changes his perspective:

“Aged and bent he looked, and quite bowed down; and yet he looked a wiser man, and a better man, than in the days when in this life he wanted nothing but Facts” (205).

Thus, through the character of Mr. Gradgrind, Dickens shows the ineffectiveness of Utilitarian values, and provides readers with a blunt moral lesson on treating others as humans rather than numbers or statistics.

All textual evidence is pulled from the Norton Critical Edition of Hard Times, 3rd Ed.

In the story, "A Christmas Carol," what point does Scrooge's nephew, Fred, make about who suffers the most from Scrooge's negative attitude?

In Stave Three of "A Christmas Carol," Scrooge sees a glimpse of the present-day when he is visited by the Ghost of Christmas Present. During a look into his nephew's house, he hears Fred make an important conclusion about Scrooge's negative attitude:

Who suffers by his ill whims? Himself, always.

In other words, the only person who suffers as a result of Scrooge's temper is Scrooge himself. This conclusion represents one of the story's most important social messages: namely, that people who mistreat others and do not change will become the victims of their own misgivings. This is because a negative attitude leads to feelings of alienation and isolation, as we see through the character of Scrooge. Throughout his past, he has mistreated so many people that he spends his days alone and nobody asks about his health, as we learn in Stave One:

Nobody ever stopped him in the street to say, with gladsome looks, "My dear Scrooge, how are you. When will you come to see me.'' No beggars implored him to bestow a trifle, no children asked him what it was o'clock, no man or woman ever once in all his life inquired the way to such and such a place, of Scrooge. 

Scrooge reacts to this scene with uncharacteristic happiness:

Uncle Scrooge had imperceptibly become so gay and light of heart, that he would have pledged the unconscious company in return, and thanked them in an inaudible speech, if the Ghost had given him time. 

The explanation for this change in his demeanor is that Scrooge is beginning to understand how his negativity has affected himself and those around him. He has taken the first steps to reformation and redemption and is finally enjoying life, just like his nephew, Fred.  

Explain how the Cold War affects democracy that the Greeks introduced. Tell the different viewpoints of the Cold War and the justification behind...

The Cold War was a competition between two competing ideologies. The communists, led by the Soviet Union, proposed that capitalism exploited the lower class working citizens and that wealth should be distributed more evenly amongst the people. On the other hand, capitalist democracies believed that redistributing wealth was a violation of personal liberties and that capitalism was the truest form of freedom. The capitalist agenda was led by the United States and her allies.

The democracy that was introduced at Athens had been long dead by the time of the Cold War. What replaced it was the representative democracy in which citizens elect officials to make decisions for them. Moving forward in this essay, we will address representative democracy as "democracy." Democracy was threatened by the Cold War on two levels. First, the influences of the military and large corporations that produced defense systems were very evident on the American government and its democracy. President Dwight D. Eisenhower called this mechanism the Military-Industrial Complex and warned against it becoming too powerful in government. The Military-Industrial Complex benefited from the specter of conflict that the Cold War fostered.

Secondly, in an effort to stop the spread of communism to new countries, the United States made decisions that undermined democracy in the world. It supported dictatorships that crushed democracy in their countries, often by brutal force. For its part, the Soviet Union created satellite countries from nations that were previously representative in nature.

Why is it wrong to lie and save yourself and endanger others?

This is a question of ethics, and one that even the most well-versed philosophers may have trouble answering.

One of the most base instincts in humans is to survive, and this may drive us to save ourselves at the expense of others. Depending on your philosophical beliefs, lying to save oneself and endanger others may be a fine course of action or totally unacceptable. 

In order to properly answer this question, we have to address a few others.

Is your life more valuable than that of others? Will your act of lying to save yourself do more good than the combined lives of those you are endangering? Famous philosopher Immanuel Kant believed that all good or proper actions contributed to the "greater good" or the benefit of all mankind. Kant would argue that it is not at all acceptable to lie to save yourself when it endangers others because it does not benefit those you are endangering.

In contrast, Utilitarian ethics might allow for lying to save oneself if the end result is the most useful. If your life is indeed more useful and valuable than those of the people you are endangering, and the end result is more useful and beneficial than an alternative, it would be permissible to lie to save yourself.

Altruism ethics holds that an individual's actions must be evaluated based on the impact it has on others. Because lying to save yourself would place others in danger, it would not be an altruistic act, even if you contributed more in your life than the sum of your peers' lives.

Most scholars of ethics (or philosophy, religion, etc) would probably say that it is not acceptable to lie to save yourself and endanger others because of the harm it does to these people, but we can consider scenarios where it might be the appropriate course of action.

In Of Mice and Men is George Milton responsible for the failure of his dreams?

George has two differing dreams in Steinbeck's novel Of Mice and Men. On one hand he wishes he were free of Lennie and could take off on his own and not have to worry about Lennie losing him a job. This dream involves being able to do whatever he wants without being Lennie's caretaker. In chapter one he says,

"God a’mighty, if I was alone I could live so easy. I could go get a job an’ work, an’ no trouble. No mess at all, and when the end of the month come I could take my fifty bucks and go into town and get whatever I want. Why, I could stay in a cat house all night. I could eat any place I want, hotel or any place, and order any damn thing I could think of. An’ I could do all that every damn month. Get a gallon of whisky, or set in a pool room and play cards or shoot pool.”

The reader may assume that George doesn't really want this. He could probably get rid of Lennie at any time, but they are friends and he feels a definite sense of loyalty to the mentally challenged man. 

George's second dream which includes Lennie, and later Candy, is to have a farm where he can raise his own crops and be his own boss. For George, this is an idyllic existence. He describes it several times in the book. In chapter three he says,

“Sure, we’d have a little house an’ a room to ourself. Little fat iron stove, an’ in the winter we’d keep a fire goin’ in it. It ain’t enough land so we’d have to work too hard. Maybe six, seven hours a day. We wouldn’t have to buck no barley eleven hours a day. An’ when we put in a crop, why, we’d be there to take the crop up. We’d know what come of our planting.” 

Once Candy joins George and Lennie the dream is within their grasps until Lennie accidentally kills Curley's wife. This event, and Lennie's death at George's hands, is foreshadowed early in the book. Fate is against these men. No matter what they do or how hard they dream they are bound to fail. The title of the book comes from the Robert Burns' poem "To a Mouse." Burns wrote: "The best laid plans of mice and men often go astray."

Steinbeck's philosophy in this novel, and in several of his novels (especially East of Eden), is deterministic. Free will and the ability to make their own future eludes these men. Their fate is determined from the description of Lennie's trouble with girl in the red dress in Weed. In the end George realizes they never had a chance as he tells Candy:

“—I think I knowed from the very first. I think I know’d we’d never do her. He usta like to hear about it so much I got to thinking maybe we would.”

No matter what he would have done George could not change the ultimate outcome of his friendship with Lennie. There was never any chance of freedom or having that "little piece of land."

I need to find two quotes dealing with Atticus's teaching Jem and Scout one of his morals, patience. What are the best quotes for that?

Atticus is an amazing father. As such, he teaches many moral lessons to his children. As you say, patience is one of them. He teaches patience indirectly. It is important to make this point, because there is no single passage that speaks of Atticus teaching patience directly.

Atticus teaches Jem patience when he reads to Mrs. Dubose. All the children know that Mrs. Dubose is an ill-tempered woman, who can be abrasive. However, Atticus wants Jem to read to her. As he does, Jem learns about true courage, but he would not have learned this lesson until he committed to her, which required patience. So, indirectly, Atticus taught Jem two lessons - one about courage, the other about patience. Here is a quote that shows how Jem had to learn patience:

“Yes sir. She wants me to come every afternoon after school and Saturdays and read to her out loud for two hours. Atticus, do I have to?"

“Certainly."

“But she wants me to do it for a month.” “Then you’ll do it for a month.”

We also see this in Atticus's interaction with Scout. Scout is an impetuous girl. She fights a lot when things do not go her way. Atticus forbids her to do so. One of the ways he does this is by making her see things from the perspective of others. This lesson is related to patience. Here is a quote:

“First of all,” he said, “if you can learn a simple trick, Scout, you’ll get along a lot better with all kinds of folks. You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view-"

“Sir?"

“-until you climb into his skin and walk around in it.”

Finally, we can say that Atticus's defense of Tom Robinson is also a lesson on patience, because Atticus knows that he will lose. So, he will have to appeal. This, too, takes patience. We can say he teaches by example.

 

What is the unit for volume?

The S.I. base unit for volume is the cubic meter or m^3. S.I. stands for Systeme Internationale, and includes the measurement units that are used by scientists all over the world. 

The cubic meter is too large to be practical for most laboratory measurements so smaller metric units are used most of the time.  Those commonly used are the liter (L), the cubic centimeter (cm^3) and the milliliter (ml). They are related as follows:

1 cubic meter = 1000 liters

1 liter = 1000 milliliters

1 milliliter = 1 cubic centimeter

A cube that is 10 cm on each side has a volume of 1 liter, which is also (10cm)^3 or 1000 cm. Since milli- is the prefix that means 1/1000, 1 cm^3 is also 1 ml So the two can be used interchangeably.

One cm^3 of water at 25º or close to it has a mass of 1 gram, so in this case grams can also be used interchangeably with the volume units ml and cm^3.

What type of irony is it when the detectives eat the leg of lamb in "Lamb to the Slaughter"?

When the detectives eat the leg of lamb in “Lamb to the Slaughter,” it is an example of situational irony. You might think that this is dramatic irony, but it is better to say that it is situational.

Dramatic irony occurs when we, as the audience, know something important that the characters do not.  This would seem to be what is happening when the detectives eat the lamb.  We know they are destroying the murder weapon (the only evidence that can point to Mary Maloney’s guilt), but they do not.  However, dramatic irony is supposed to cause suspense that will later be resolved.  That is not the case here because the scene in which the detectives eat the leg of lamb is the end of the story.  Therefore, it does not build any suspense that gets resolved.

Instead, this is situational irony.  Situational irony is when there is a big difference between what you expect to happen and what does happen.  In this story, we would expect the detectives to be smart and able to uncover any clues that will point to Patrick Maloney’s killer. We expect them to find and arrest the killer. Instead, what we get is the detectives destroying the evidence.  Instead of finding and arresting the killer, they make sure that she will never be caught.  This is situational irony because it is very different from what we expect.  It is more like a joke and less like something that is meant (as dramatic irony is) to build suspense.

What could be a good compound-complex sentence out of the story "Thank You, M'am"?

I am not sure if you are asking how to write a sentence about the story or find a sentence in the story, so I will give you an example of both.

A compound-complex sentence has two types of clauses.  One type of clause is independent, and the other is subordinate (also known as dependent). A clause is a group of words that has a subject and a verb. An independent clause expresses a complete idea, but a subordinate clause is an incomplete thought.

A compound sentence has at least two independent clauses.  A compound-complex sentence has at lease two independent clauses and at least one subordinate clause.  It’s a combination of a compound sentence and a complex sentence.

Here is an example of a compound-complex sentence written about the story.

Roger is a boy who steals a woman’s purse, but he learns a valuable lesson.

The independent clauses are “Roger is a boy” and “he learns a valuable lesson.”

The subordinate clause is “who steals a woman’s purse.”

If you need an example of a compound-complex sentence from the story, here is one.

The woman did not watch the boy to see if he was going to run now, nor did she watch her purse which she left behind her on the day-bed.

“The woman did not watch the boy” is the first independent clause and the second is “did she watch her purse.”  The subordinate clauses are “to see if he was going to run now” and “which she left behind her on the day-bed.”

The clause “to see if he was going to run now” is also an infinitive clause, which means that it includes an infinitive, “to see.”

How can you tell if these are subordinate clauses?  The clause “which she left behind her on the day-bed” is not a complete thought.  It does not make sense as a sentence on its own.  Therefore, it is a subordinate clause. “The woman did not watch the boy” is an independent clause because it expresses a complete thought.

What did Mary's husband indicate to her?

I believe that your question is asking about the short story "Lamb to the Slaughter" by Roald Dahl.  The main character's name is Mary, and she gets away with the murder of her husband.  She killed her husband by hitting him in the head with a frozen leg of lamb.  She then cooked the leg of lamb and fed it to the clueless detectives.  

Mary is not a murdering psychopath.  In fact, she is not even remotely unhappy with her husband, Patrick.  She is the quintessential doting wife.  She sits quietly at home waiting for Patrick to come home from work, and then she practically waits on him hand and foot.  

She took his coat and hung it in the closer. Then she walked over and made the drinks, a strongish one for him, a weak one for herself; and soon she was back again in her chair with the sewing, and he in the other, opposite, holding the tall glass with both hands, rocking it so the ice cubes tinkled against the side.

For her, this was always a blissful time of day.

Unfortunately for Mary, Patrick apparently doesn't feel the same way for her anymore.  Soon after arriving home from work, he makes an announcement to Mary.  The reader is never told what the announcement is exactly, but the reader can be quite sure that Patrick told Mary that he is leaving her or wants a divorce.  

“This is going to be a bit of a shock to you, I’m afraid,” he said. “But I’ve thought about it a good deal and I’ve decided the only thing to do is tell you right away. I hope you won’t blame me too much.”

And he told her. It didn’t take long, four or five minutes at most, and she say very still through it all, watching him with a kind of dazed horror as he went further and further away from her with each word.

“So there it is,” he added. “And I know it’s kind of a bad time to be telling you, bet there simply wasn’t any other way. Of course I’ll give you money and see you’re looked after.

A few minutes later Mary struck Patrick dead with the leg of lamb and proceeded to secure her alibi in order to get away with the crime.  

How does Jem, Scout, and Dill test their courage in To Kill a Mockingbird?

There are several ways Jem, Scout, and Dill test their courage as they mature and grow over the years in the novel To Kill a Mockingbird.  Here are a few examples:

When Jem, Scout, and Dill are rolling in a tire down the street, Scout rolls into the Radley yard.  Jem quickly runs into the yard to save her despite his fear of Boo Radley.

Jem and Dill decide to ask Boo out for ice cream and get a fishing pole and poke a note through the Radley window.  This shows their courage to go against the rumors about Boo and try to find out what Boo is really like.

Jem sneaks up on the porch of the Radley house to peek in the window while Dill keeps a lookout.  Jem sees a shadow on the wall and runs off.  In an attempt to get over the Radley fence, he catches his pants on the wire and has to take them off to escape.  Nathan Radley fires a shot into the air to scare off the intruders, and despite his fear, Jem goes back to get his pants off the fence and finds them repaired and folded neatly waiting for him.

Scout, Jem, and Dill know something is up when Atticus takes the car to the jailhouse the night Tom Robinson is moved there.  They sneak off to see what is going on, and as the lynch mob approaches Atticus sitting outside the jail protecting Tom, the children run to Atticus to protect him.  Jem refuses to leave, and Scout ends up dispersing the mob by saying “hey,” to Mr. Cunningham. 

Dill shows courage by running away from home to be with Scout and Jem in Maycomb.

Jem shows courage when he attempts to fight off Bob Ewell during the attack after the school play.

All of the children show courage during the trial when they realize that Atticus’ defense has failed.  Dill cries; however, all of the children show and understand the respect they have for Atticus’ brave stance.

Jem shows courage when he follows through with reading to Mrs. Dubose.  It was a difficult thing to do, and Jem shows his integrity by doing it. 

Explain how gender roles, as in the independence of men and dependence of women, are represented in The Merchant of Venice.

The Merchant of Venice explores gender roles in interesting ways. It expresses the dependent role women have in society in comparison to men, but it also depicts independent women and dependent men.

Portia laments that she may not choose her husband. Her deceased father directed that she can only marry the man who chooses the correct casket and poem that are set before him:

O me, the word 'choose!' I may neither choose whom I would nor refuse whom I dislike; so is the will of a living daughter curbed by the will of a dead father. Is it not hard, Nerissa, that I cannot choose one nor refuse none?

Even a deceased man can hold more power than a living woman. Fortunately, Bassanio, the man Portia fancies, chooses correctly and the two marry. Portia then demonstrates more independence than dependence by freeing Bassanio’s friend Antonio from Shylock’s wrath. She offers up her money, disguises herself as a male lawyer, and uses her cunning to free Antonio from his legal bond. Portia’s waiting woman Nerissa also dresses as a man and accompanies her.

Women often hold the upper hand here. While still disguised, the two women test their husbands’ loyalty by tricking the men into giving them their wedding rings. Shylock’s daughter Jessica is another example of a woman with an independent streak. She runs off with a Christian and steals from her father, spending money and selling treasures as she goes.

In terms of how men are portrayed as dependent, the entire plot revolves around men being indebted to one another. Bassanio relies on Antonio’s and then Portia’s wealth, and Antonio almost dies at the hand of his lender Shylock. In terms of relationships, Antonio appears to be even more emotionally reliant on Bassanio than Portia is. Salanio remarks, “I think he [Antonio] only loves the world for him [Bassanio].”

Consequently, though the men and women in The Merchant of Venice sometimes uphold traditional gender roles, many of characters subvert them.

Who is Tybalt? What makes him a villain?

Tybalt is Juliet's cousin, an outspoken and often hot-headed Capulet who is proud of his family name.  With regard to his being a "villain," dictionary.com defines a villain as, "a character in a play, novel, or the like, who constitutes an important evil agency in the plot" (see website below).  Thus, a villain is not just someone who is evil, but, rather, someone whose evilness contributes significantly to the plot of the story in question.

Tybalt fits the description of a villain.  Not only does he pick a fight with the Montagues in Act 1, Scene 1 and vow revenge later in the play after Romeo has attended the Capulet party, but his "evilness" causes him to sword fight with Mercutio in a way that ultimately leads to Mercutio's death.  This is a pivotal scene within the play, as it leads to the downfall of Romeo and Juliet's marriage and, eventually, to their double suicides. While Tybalt did not intend to kill Mercutio, the fact that he does, and that his intent in that scene was not good to begin with, makes him fulfill the definition of a villain.

Explain why the sun is the source of almost all of the earth's energy resources?

Almost all the energy sources on Earth are forms of solar energy. The only exception is the geothermal energy. Our common sources of energy include fossil fuels, such as, coal, petroleum, natural gas, etc. Other sources include wood, solar energy, wind energy, etc. Sun's energy can be directly used as solar energy. Wood is a result of plant growth. Plants derive the energy from the process of photosynthesis. In this process, plants use carbon dioxide and water, in presence of sunlight, and generate glucose and oxygen. In this way, sun is the source of wood and other plant components. Animals eat plant and/or each other and thus derive energy from plants, directly or indirectly. Fossil fuels are fossilized form of plants and animals and thus forms of solar energy.Thus, Sun is the source of all energy resources on Earth.

Hope this helps.

I've been asked to imagine that I am a particular character in a work of literature. I must place yourself in their body, emotions, and...

This is certainly an interesting essay prompt. On the upside, you have a lot of freedom in how you approach your essay. For some writers, however, this may also be a drawback. For this assignment, you will have to use your imagination and take some creative license with a piece of literature that you admire. The first step is finding a text and character that you consider interesting. Do you admire a certain character from The Lord of the Rings series? Is your personality similar to Hermione Granger from The Harry Potter series? Or do you relate to characters from more canonical pieces of literature such as The Catcher in the Rye or Things Fall Apart? The choice is ultimately up to you, but you should certainly choose a character with whom you share characteristics.

Next, this exercise calls for you to analyze major decisions your character has made throughout the course of the work. First, you must evaluate and defend one of his/her decisions. Why is your chosen character justified in this action? Next, you should criticize one of your character's actions, and elaborate on how you would have done things differently. Finally, you need to argue why your character is the most important character in the work. This may all seem daunting, but remember that you are persuading your audience to view this character the way that you do. You are making a series of arguments concerning the character and defending your reasoning with textual evidence.

As far as getting started with the writing process, I would suggest doing substantial prewriting before you begin your essay. Have you ever tried freewriting? It's a neat technique attributed to rhetorical critic Peter Elbow. All that you have to do in this form of prewriting is write uninterrupted prose. Don't stop to edit or check your spelling, just write for a set block of time. You may be able to mine a few interesting pieces from your freewrite and then edit them into something more cohesive. Additionally, I find that having a solid outline helps me when I write. The more time you put into your writing process (prewriting, drafting, revising and editing, and proofreading), the better your essay will be. 

`cos(u + v)` Find the exact value of the trigonometric expression given that sin(u) = -7/25 and cos(v) = -4/5 (Both u and v are in quadrant III.)

Given `sin(u)=-7/25,cos(v)=-4/5`

Angles u and v are in quadrant 3.

A right triangle can be drawn in quadrant 3. Since `sin(u)=-7/25`  we know that the side opposite angle u is 7 and the hypotenuse is 25. Using the pythagorean theorem the third side of the triangle is 24.

A right triangle can be drawn in quadrant 3. Since `cos(v)=-4/5`    we know that the side adjacent to angle v is 4 and the hypotenuse is 5. Using the pythagorean theorem the third side of the triangle is 3.

`cos(u+v)=cos(u)cos(v)-sin(u)sin(v)`

`cos(u+v)=(-24/25)(-4/5)-(-7/25)(-3/5)=(96/125)-(21/25)=75/125=3/5` 

If I were to pack stuff to go to Argentina in the December, what should I pack? I figure that I would pack shorts and short sleeve shirt due to...

Yes Argentina is in the Southern Hemisphere and will experience very hot temperatures during this time. Be sure to pack summer clothes. Additionally, research which area you might be because even though it is Summer, be sure to pack some winter clothes like a jacket or something warm just in case. 

 I live in South Africa, so we have similar weather conditions. In South Africa last year we experienced cold fronts during summer as well - signs of climate change and climate change, and also experienced extremely hot temperatures from the El-Nino effect. The El-Nino effect has been causing drastic weather changes globally. 

My advice is to focus on packing summer clothes and have some winter clothes for that rainy day. Enjoy Argentina!

If you have 30.0g of SiO2 reacting with 200.0mL of 3.00M HF and 13.2g of SiF4 actually forms, can you answer the following: a) what mass of SiF4...

A) In order to calculate the maximum mass of SiF4 that can form, also called the theoretical yield, we need to find out which of the two reactants is the limiting reactant:

`SiO_2 + 4HF -> SiF_4 + 2H_2O` 

The molar masses we will need to know are:

SiO2: 60.1 g/mol

SiF4: 104 g/mol

moles SiO2 = 30.0g X (1 mol/60.1g) = 0.499 moles

moles HF = (200.0 ml)(1 Liter/1000 ml)(3.00 moles/Liter) = 0.600 moles

The mole ratio of HF to SiO2 is 4:1 according to the balanced equation. We don't have four times as many moles of HF as SiO2, therefore HF is the limiting reactant and it determines the amount of SiF4 that can be produced:

0.600 mol HF X (1 mol SiF4/4 mol HF) X (104g/1mol) = 15.6 g SiF4 that can be produced.

B) The mass of SiO2 that reacted is:

0.600 mol HF X (1 SiO2/4 HF) X (60.1g/1mol) = 9.00 grams

30.0g SiO2 - 9.00g reacted = 21.0 grams SiO2 left unreacted

C) Percent error = actual yield/theoretical yield X 100%

 = 13.4g/15.6g = 0.84 X 100% =  84.6% yield

What was the Reformation parliament?

The Reformation Parliament was the English parliament that passed significant legislation leading to the English Reformation. The pieces of legislation were passed between 1532 and 1534, leading to the separation with Rome.

The English Reformation mostly affected religious practice and the general way of life. Prior to the Reformation, the Church had sweeping authority over the administration of the region and the general way of life. For instance, the church prevented the King (Henry VIII) from divorcing his wife Catherine of Aragon. However, the Reformation Parliament, at the behest of the King, passed legislation that gave it authority over the realm. Further, previous powers vested on the Pope were transferred to the Crown.

The power shift from the Pope to the Crown was instituted through parliament, which made royal power increasingly potent. This was because of the support coming from the peoples’ representatives in parliament.

What methods were used by Napoleon to dominate Europe?

Born in 1769, Napoleon Bonaparte became the Emperor of the French in 1804 until 1814 and again in 1815. In his conquests, Napoleon used military power to overcome various countries in Europe and then annex them to France. But he also used another important tactic: he placed members of his family on the various thrones of Europe to cement their link to France. Napoleon himself married an Austrian princess, Marie-Louise, in 1810, for example. One of his brothers became the King of Naples and, later, the King of Spain. Another brother, Louis, became the King of Holland and another, Jerome, became king of Westphalia. Napoleon also placed Bernadotte, one of his marshals, was made the king of Sweden. This tactic was inspired by Alexander the Great, one of Napoleon's historical idols, and was very successful in strengthening Napoleon's grasp over Europe.  

What is a way that Lyddie is brave in chapters 1- 4?

The most obvious example of Lyddie's bravery in the first four chapters is her confrontation with the bear. When a black bear pokes its nose through the door of the cabin that has been left ajar, Lyddie keeps a cool head. She orders the rest of the family, even her mother, to climb up the ladder to the loft. She stays on the main floor until everyone else is safely above. She maintains fierce eye contact with the bear, and that keeps it from coming in until she has gotten up to the loft. When Charlie accidentally hits it with the edge of the ladder, the bear rears up, and once again Lyddie locks eyes with it. This encounter reveals Lyddie's courage and leadership. She takes charge of the situation, putting herself in danger in order to save her family. 

Lyddie reveals this same courage when her mother says she wants to leave their home to go await the end of the world at her sister's house. Lyddie refuses to go with her mother and decides to stay on the farm with Charlie, trying to keep the place running until their father returns. Again, Lyddie is willing to face hardship and danger for the good of her family. She believes the best thing for her family is to all be together in the cabin, and she wants to make sure her father can find them when he returns. Therefore she takes on the daunting task of running their household herself with only Charlie to assist her. 

When Lyddie finds out she has been hired out to Cutler's Tavern, she bravely puts herself into her work at the Tavern without sulking or pitying herself. She continues to show bravery when she is in hard situations whether facing down a bear, running a home by herself, or working in a difficult position.

What literary element is used in Audre Lorde's "Power" and what is its significance in the text?

The literary element used in Audre Lorde's poem "Power" is monologue. The poet, using a narrator, is vividly presenting views in first person—this narrator is talking directly to the audience in everyday language and not mincing words at all. The significance of using the literary/poetic device of monologue is that the reader gets to experience the narrator’s views, beliefs, and emotions first-hand. There is no intermediary telling this story from a third-person point-of-view. The reader feels that he or she is there with the person.

The power of this monologue is its ability to shock the reader with unmediated statements from someone (this narrator) who has strong views about the issues of the day. These are the issues that affect her and her circle of influence. Consider this line from the poem:

and one day I will take my teenaged plug

and connect it to the nearest socket

raping an 85 year old white woman

who is somebody's mother

The power of this line, describing a horrible and immoral, despicable act, is that we, the readers, are hearing this from the “horse’s mouth.” The line is not presented to us in an objective, bland, third-person way, as if it is a dry item in a local newspaper. We are presented with all the venom and anger of the narrator, by the narrator.

This person has very strong opinions on race relations and the toxic history concerning the battle between blacks and whites in America. The narrator feels revenge may be the only option available if she does not learn to “to use the difference between poetry and rhetoric”, which she earlier stated was “being ready to kill yourself instead of your children.”

She does not want to get out of hand and become vengeful and violent, but she does want justice. She feels she may resort to terrible acts unless she learns to restrain herself. The significance of monologue in this poem is that it forces the reader to consider the terrible treatment some blacks have received in U.S. society (and beyond) over the centuries.

After reading this poem in its monologue from, the reader cannot deny the impact of the narrator’s emotions on his or her own views and feelings. Therefore, monologue is an “in-your-face” poetic element to lend force to the narrator’s beliefs.

In "The Monkey's Paw," what was the White family's last wish?

Actually, the last wish was only Mr. White's. Both husband and wife believed their son Herbert had come back from the dead as a result of their second wish. Mr. White was horrified at the prospect of seeing Herbert as he must look after being mangled in the machinery at work and then being dead and buried for ten days. Mrs. White, on the other hand, was anxious to open the door and hug her son. Unlike her husband, she had never seen his body and had no idea how horrible he must look. The tiny woman was having a hard time opening the door because one of the bolts was too high for her to reach.

"For God's sake don't let it in," cried the old man, trembling.

"You're afraid of your own son," she cried struggling. "Let me go. I'm coming, Herbert; I'm coming."

The reader has been made to believe that it must be Herbert doing all that knocking and dreads seeing the living-dead monster if Mrs. White gets the door open. Herbert was introduced as a good-natured, funny young man full of high spirits. But if he came back to live with his parents after being dead and buried, he would not be the same Herbert. The feeling produced here is uncanny. Imagine having to live with such a creature!

So Mr. White finally makes a decision of his own. The first wish was suggested by Herbert, and his father wished for two hundred pounds. The second wish was forced on White by his wife, who insisted that he wish for Herbert to come back to them. The third and final wish was White's alone. We do not know the exact words he said, but he obviously wished that the knocking would cease and the person knocking would go away forever.

"The bolt," she cried loudly. "Come down. I can't reach it."

But her husband was on his hands and knees groping wildly on the floor in search of the paw....He heard the creaking of the bolt as it came slowly back, and at the same moment he found the monkey's paw, and frantically breathed his third and last wish.

The knocking ceases as soon as he makes the wish. When his wife opens the door there is no one there. Mr. White follows her outside and then runs down to the gate.

The street lamp flickering opposite shone on a quiet and deserted road. 

Was it really Herbert out there, or some lost traveler seeking directions? If it was a real human being knocking, where did he disappear to?

What was the basis for The Seven Commandments in Animal Farm?

The Commandments have their origin in the message Old Major, Mr Jones' prize boar and the most respected animal on the farm, had conveyed to the other animals during a secret meeting in the big barn. During the gathering he had informed the animals about a dream he had had and why it was so important.

In his message, Old Major mentioned, in part, the following:

No animal in England knows the meaning of happiness or leisure after he is a year old. No animal in England is free. The life of an animal is misery and slavery: that is the plain truth...

"But is this simply part of the order of nature? Is it because this land of ours is so poor that it cannot afford a decent life to those who dwell upon it? No, comrades, a thousand times no! ...

Why then do we continue in this miserable condition? Because nearly the whole of the produce of our labour is stolen from us by human beings. There, comrades, is the answer to all our problems. It is summed up in a single word--Man. Man is the only real enemy we have. Remove Man from the scene, and the root cause of hunger and overwork is abolished for ever.

"Man is the only creature that consumes without producing. He does not give milk, he does not lay eggs, he is too weak to pull the plough, he cannot run fast enough to catch rabbits. Yet he is lord of all the animals. He sets them to work, he gives back to them the bare minimum that will prevent them from starving, and the rest he keeps for himself. Our labour tills the soil, our dung fertilises it, and yet there is not one of us that owns more than his bare skin ..."

The old boar then urged the animals to fight against Man's tyranny and prepare for rebellion. He stated that he did not know when the revolution would happen but that when it did, the animals should be careful not to become like their vanquished masters. He, furthermore, stated:

"... And among us animals let there be perfect unity, perfect comradeship in the struggle. All men are enemies. All animals are comrades."

and

"... Whatever goes upon two legs is an enemy. Whatever goes upon four legs, or has wings, is a friend. And remember also that in fighting against Man, we must not come to resemble him. Even when you have conquered him, do not adopt his vices. No animal must ever live in a house, or sleep in a bed, or wear clothes, or drink alcohol, or smoke tobacco, or touch money, or engage in trade. All the habits of Man are evil. And, above all, no animal must ever tyrannise over his own kind. Weak or strong, clever or simple, we are all brothers. No animal must ever kill any other animal. All animals are equal."

Old Major completed his speech by then telling the animals about the dream he had had which related to the anthem, 'Beasts of England' that conveyed the utopian existence the animals would enjoy once Man had been removed.

The pigs then developed what Old Major had said into a system of thought which they called Animalism. From this, they fashioned the seven commandments which were written on the wall of the barn in big white letters by Snowball. The commandments would form the basis of their conduct on the farm and would be unalterable.

Ironically, exactly the opposite happened. The pigs, through a process of propaganda, manipulation, abuse and terror, managed to enslave the other animals and systematically convert the commandments to justify their greed and tyranny until only one amazingly fatuous rule was left:

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

In To Kill a Mockingbird is Atticus considered to have good self-control?

Yes. Atticus is the novel's morally upright character, and there are numerous scenes that depict Atticus displaying self-control. In Chapter 11, Scout recounts how her father reacts to Mrs. Henry Lafayette Dubose's ignorant comments. Scout mentions that every time Atticus would pass her house he would politely say, "Good evening, Mrs. Dubose! You look like a picture this evening," and would wish her a happy day. (Lee 134) Atticus is aware that she makes derogatory comments directed towards him and the children. He tells Jem that it's his job to not let her make him mad. Atticus displays tolerance and self-control by not reacting aggressively or taking offense to her comments. Instead, Atticus keeps a "level head" and treats her with respect and kindness.

Later on in the novel, Bob Ewell runs into Atticus at the post office following the trial. Bob Ewell is bitter and begins to curse and insult Atticus in public. When Bob Ewell spits in Atticus' face, Atticus calmly takes out his handkerchief and wipes it off. Bob even challenges him by saying, "Too proud to fight, you nigger-lovin' bastard?" and Atticus simply says, "No, too old" and walks away. (Lee 290) This is the clearest example of Atticus displaying self-control in the novel. He understands Bob's difficult position and lets him vent his anger. Instead of reacting with anger, Atticus endures Bob's insults and calmly walks away.

What are the disadvantages of Blanche in the play A Streetcar Named Desire by Tennessee Williams?

Blanche DuBois has many disadvantages. She has lost Belle Reve, her ancestral home. She has just lost her job as a high-school English teacher because of her predilection for seducing young boys. Therefore she has no money, no income, and no home. She has acquired a bad reputation in her home town of Laurel because of drinking, fornication, and other vices. She has been forced to seek shelter with her sister Stella, who is married to the animalistic Stanley Kowalski and is six-months pregnant. Blanche is getting older and losing her grip on her only option for salvation, which is to find a good man to marry her and support her. All these problems lead to another problem, which is her conflict with Stanley. He doesn't want her intruding in his household, and he knows instinctively, with a sort of animal instinct, that she abhors him and will cause him troubles with Stella. She and Stanley are enemies, but this is another great disadvantage for Blanche because she is weak where he is strong, she is broke and he provides all the money for the household as well as all the liquor, she is sensitive where he is insensitive, she is idealistic and romantic where he is a brutal realist. She can't help annoying him just by being there in the small apartment. She doesn't even have a bedroom of her own. When the baby comes, Blanche will be even more obviously in the way because she is taking up the space which will have to be used for the new baby. If Stanley were a gentleman he would try to accommodate her. If he liked her he would let her stay. But he is not a gentleman and he hates her and everything she stands for, just as she hates everything he stands for. The play is largely about the warfare between Blanche and Stanley, which she is bound to lose. She uses old-fashioned politeness, proper manners, good grammar, and all the armor of he upper class to shame him and to turn her sister against him. He uses direct aggression and deliberate vulgarity to make her look like a phoney.

The two antagonists seem intended to represent the Old South and the New South. Stanley. The Old South had polished manners and refined tastes, but their economy was based on slavery. Stanley senses that Blanche has more than one skeleton in her closet. He does some investigating and finds out why she lost her job and what sort of reputation she has in her hometown. In Scene Seven he reveals what he has learned to Stella:

Honey, I told you I thoroughly checked on these stories! Now wait till I finished. The trouble with Dame Blanche was that she couldn't put on her act any more in Laurel! They got wised up after two or three dates with her and then they quit, and she goes on to another, the same old line, same old act, same old hooey! But the town was too small for this to go on forever! And as time went by she became a town character. Rgarded as not just different but downright loco--nuts.

He destroys Blanche's one last hope of survival by conveying all this information to his friend Mitch, who was charmed by Blanche's upper-class pretensions and was about to propose marriage. Stanley completes his destruction of the sensitive, vulnerable Blanche by raping her while his wife Stella is in the hospital delivering their baby. Blanche suffers a mental breakdown and has to be taken to an institution, where she will live out the rest of her days.

The play is gripping because it pits two such different characters against each other. Blanche uses wit and words as weapons. Stanley uses brutality and vulgarity, of which he has an abundant reserve. We can sympathize with Blanche because, in addition to being the underdog, she faces problems we all face or will have to face in the future. There is no security in life. We are all in danger of losing our livelihoods. We all encounter enemies who threaten our relationships and our self-images. We are all growing older--and there is no cure for that. We would all like life to be better than it actually is. We would all like to be loved--but love is hard to find and harder to keep. When Blanche is taken off to the mental asylum at the end of the play, we feel somehow that we are going along with her. She is a tragic figure, despite all her faults. Stanley has won the battle. He has gotten rid of her. But we don't feel like congratulating him. Why not? Because he was bound to win. People like him always win.

A struggle for existence naturally follows from the high rate at which all organic beings tend to increase. There is no exception to the rule that every organic being naturally increases at so high a rate, that if not destroyed, the earth would soon be covered by the progeny of a single pair.
Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species 

The condition of man . . . is a condition of war of everyone against everyone.
Thomas Hobbes

What is a variable (independent, controlled, dependent) and what is data? What is a description of accuracy, reliability, and validity?

A variable is an item, trait, or other factor within a scientific experiment that can change in quantity. In order to determine what causes the results of an experiment, only one variable should be changed at a time.

An independent variable is the variable whose quantity is regulated by the scientist. Therefore, the term “manipulated variable” can be used interchangeably with the term independent variable. The value of an independent variable determines the value of the other variables within the experiment.

The dependent variable is the variable that is measured by the scientist within a scientific variable. Thus, the dependent variable results in the data collected by the scientist. This can easily be remembered because “dependent variable” and “data” both start with the letter “d”. The value of the dependent variable depends on the value of the independent variable, hence its name. For this reason, the term “responding variable” is a synonym to the term dependent variable.

A controlled variable is any factor that is kept the same amongst all groups within a scientific experiment. Controls are used as constants so that scientists can easily determine what variable is responsible for a change.

The accuracy of an experiment is how close a data point is to the actual value of a known standard. Thus, accuracy can be thought of as the nearness of a data point to the bullseye of a dart board.

Accuracy can be compared to precision. Precision is the nearness of multiple data points to one another. Data is considered precise if the data points are clumped together, even if the clump of data points is not near a standard known value.

Reliability of a scientific experiment speaks to the consistency of the scientific tools used and, thus, the data produced. Reliable data is consistent. If an experiment is reliable, many scientists should be able to repeat the same procedures and obtain the same results.

In science, validity refers to whether or not an argument, conclusion, measurement, or test relates to real-world applications. Validity refers to how well an experiment truly represents it claims.

What are some specific passages in Tom Sawyer where Twain uses sarcasm to critique the traditions of small town life?

In the early chapters of Tom Sawyer, Mark Twain employs sarcasm to critique the traditions of small town life, Sarcasm consists of remarks that are intended to ridicule.

--In Chapter 1, when Tom encounters a new boy, who appears to be wealthy by his attire, he is astounded. The boy wears a hat, shoes, even a necktie--"and it was only Friday," Twain adds sarcastically (as though wearing them on Sunday would make the boy's outfit more acceptable to Tom). As Tom stares at the other boy, he has a sense of the shabbiness of his own clothes, so Tom finds a way of asserting himself:

"I can lick you!"
"I'd like to see you try it."
"Well, I can do it."
"No, you can't either." 

The two continue in this manner, challenging each other until they finally fight. Tom wins, but when his back is turned, the new boy hurls a stone at him, striking him in the back. So, Tom chases the boy home and stands outside the gate, daring "the enemy" to come outside, but the "enemy" only makes faces at him while his mother calls Tom a "vicious, vulgar child."

--In Chapter 2 when Tom is assigned to whitewash a fence, he is rather discontented by this assignment; so, he tries to devise ways of getting out of the job. When Jim comes by with a bucket of water, Tom offers to let Jim whitewash part of the fence while he fetches the water. But, Jim has been forewarned by Tom's aunt that Tom will ask Jim to help him. So, when Tom offers him some of his possessions, Jim will not be swayed until Tom suggests that Jim see his sore toe. "Jim was only human--this attraction was too much for him," Twain adds. Then, Aunt Polly comes along with "triumph in her eye," so Jim runs off.

Tom's vigor in whitewashing after he sees his aunt diminishes, and he ponders alternative methods of enticement as other boys approach. He looks at the meager contents of his pockets, and he relinquishes the idea of trying to buy the others. However, Twain writes, "At this dark and hopeless moment an inspiration burst upon him! Nothing less than a great, magnificent inspiration."

When another boy comes by, Tom pretends that he is intent upon his painting and he enjoys it so much that he does not wish to go swimming with Ben when the boy suggests they go. This statement makes Ben see the act of painting "in a new light." Now, he wants to paint, too. But, Tom refuses to let him until Ben pleads and gives Tom his apple. Then, as he relaxes and eats his apple, Tom "planned the slaughter of more innocents."

--In Chapter 3 

Tom is rewarded for his having worked so hard and done such a thorough job on the whitewashing of the fence. Aunt Polly gives Tom an apple while delivering her lecture on how a treat tastes even better when it came "through virtuous effort." And, while his aunt "closed with a happy Scriptural flourish, he 'hooked' a doughnut."

As Tom departs, he sees Sid, so he throws six or seven clods that "raged like a hailstorm" around his half-brother. And, Tom's "soul was at peace, now that he had settled with Sid for calling attention to his black thread and getting him into trouble."

Further in this chapter, Twain adds another sarcastic remark when Tom Sawyer passes by the house of Jeff Thatcher and spots a new girl in the garden. She is a pretty girl with yellow hair and blue eyes. When Tom sees her, "The fresh-crowned hero fell without firing a shot."

--