How is Lennie described using animal imagery? What do these quotes suggest about Lennie?

In chapter one of Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men, the author describes Lennie with animal imagery. He does so to suggest that Lennie is not only simple-minded like an animal but also has the strength of certain animals. In the second paragraph of the novel, Lennie is physically described:

Behind him walked his opposite, a huge man, shapeless of face, with large, pale eyes, and wide, sloping shoulders; and he walked heavily, dragging his feet a little, the way a bear drags his paws. 

Lennie is heavy and slow, not only physically but mentally. He is also powerfully strong and, as George says, "a hell of a good worker." In the third paragraph he is compared to a horse:

His huge companion dropped his blankets and flung himself down and drank from the surface of the green pool; drank with long gulps, snorting into the water like a horse.

The horse comparison comes up later in the book when, in chapter five, the horses in the barn are described. Like Lennie, they are chained. Lennie is figuratively chained to repeating his mistakes over and over, just as the horses are chained to the slats in the barn and have no freedom.

A little later in chapter one, Lennie is also compared to a dog. Like a dog he is usually obedient to whatever George wants:

Slowly, like a terrier who doesn’t want to bring a ball to its master, Lennie approached, drew back, approached again. George snapped his fingers sharply, and at the sound Lennie laid the mouse in his hand.

He's not able to do anything himself, but with George's guidance he is able to get along without incident. It is when he is alone that he often gets in trouble, as in chapter five when he is alone with Curley's wife. When presented with a situation which might throw him into a panic he reverts to his animal urges, and when Curley's wife struggles he shakes her, breaking her neck.

What are some examples of foreshadowing in chapter 4 of the book Night by Elie Wiesel?

In the fourth chapter of the book Night by Elie Wiesel, readers can find examples of foreshadowing. When Eliezer and his father first arrive at Buna and are waiting to find out which unit/camp they will be assigned to, an aide to their tent leader approaches Eliezer. He wants his shoes in exchange for help getting "into a good Kommando" and being able to stay with his father (Wiesel, 48). Eliezer does not want to give up his shoes, however. The aide offers to also give Eliezer an extra ration of bread with margarine, but still he refuses. Later, Eliezer is forced to give up his shoes to someone else and given nothing in return. This foreshadows what happens later in the chapter when Franek wants Eliezer's gold tooth. Eliezer is hoping to keep his tooth so that he can trade it if necessary for extra food or to save his and his father's lives. In the end, Franek tortures Eliezer's father until he agrees to give the tooth. This time, Eliezer even has to give up some of his food on top of losing the tooth.

Another example of foreshadowing occurs when Eliezer's father is being tortured by Franek. Wiesel writes, "Unfortunately, Franek knew how to handle this; he knew my weak spot" (55). His weakness was his father and would continue to be his father throughout the events of the story. Just before the camp is liberated, Eliezer's father becomes deathly ill and eventually dies. When his father, his weakness, is finally gone, Eliezer feels a sense of freedom. Wiesel writes, "...if I could have searched the recesses of my feeble conscience, I might have found something like: free at last!" to explain his reaction to his father's death (112).

A third example of foreshadowing can be found when Eliezer describes his encounter with the young Frenchwoman he works beside in the factory. She comforts him after a brutal beating by Idek, revealing she speaks German, where before Eliezer assumed they could not communicate. She says to him, "Bite your lips, little brother...Don't cry. Keep your anger, your hate, for another day, for later. The day will come, but not now...Wait. Clench your teeth and wait" (53). This foreshadows that liberation will come and that Eliezer will survive.

A piston-cylinder device contains 0.46 kg of steam at 300 degrees Celsius and 2.5 MPa. Steam is cooled at constant pressure until one-half of the...

We can use steam tables to solve this problem.

a) When half of the mass has condensed, the system contains saturated vapor-water mix. Thus, the final temperature is the same as the saturation pressure at the final pressure. This, we can find from the steam table A-5, for a pressure of 2.5 MPa (= 2500 kPa).

The temperature at this pressure = 223.95 degree Celsius.

b) Specific volume at the initial stage, T = 300 degree Celsius and P = 2.5 Mpa = 2500 kPa can be obtained from table A-6.

Sp vol. = 0.09894 m^3/kg

At the final stage, P = 2.5 MPa = 2500 kPa, x = 0.5

v2 = vf + x2 vg = 0.001197 + 0.5 (0.079952 - 0.001197)

= 0.0405745 m^3/kg

The change in volume = m (v2- v1) = 0.46 (0.0405745 - 0.09894)

= -0.02685 m^3.

Hope this helps. 

How does the Law of Conservation of Mass apply to a burning candle?

The Law of Conservation of Mass tells us that matter is neither created nor destroyed during a chemical reaction. Atoms can be rearranged to form new compounds, but the total mass of the system remains constant.

A burning candle is an example of matter undergoing a chemical reaction and being changed into new substances. The Law of Conservation of Mass applies as the total mass of the products is equal to the total mass of the reactants.

Candle wax is a hydrocarbon that undergoes combustion. There are various components of the wax that have the general formula `C_(n)H_(2n+2)` .

Here's the equation for combustion of the wax having the formula C31H64:

`C_31H_64 + 47O_2 -> 31CO_2 + 32H_2O`

The number of each type of atom is the same on both sides of the equation, so the sum of the masses of the the wax and oxygen consumed equals the sum of the masses of the carbon dioxide and water vapor formed. Any soot formed from incomplete combustion or wax residue is also accounted for in the final mass of the products equaling the initial mass of the reactants.

The water is generated as vapor, so both products of combustion are colorless gases. This is why it might seem like the candle is disappearing as it melts, when in fact the liquid wax is being drawn up into the wick, vaporized by the heat and burned. 

In the story "The Minister's Black Veil," 1. Why do others react the way they do? What does their reaction reveal about their inner character? 2....

1. Superficially, members of Mr. Hooper's congregation react the way they do because it is just plain weird to them that their minister, without explanation or warning, simply walks out of his house one day wearing a black veil that covers his face. "[It] seemed to consist of two folds of crape, which entirely concealed his features." It can be extremely off-putting to speak to someone when one cannot see that person's eyes, but to come face-to-face with one who wishes to conceal his entire face so that an observer cannot see any part of it would feel even stranger. If the eyes are the windows to the soul, then obscuring the eyes seems to indicate that the person has something to hide, and this revelation also makes people feel very uncomfortable. One old woman says, "'He has changed himself into something awful, only by hiding his face.'"

In terms of how their reaction reveals their inner character, the subject of Mr. Hooper's sermon that day is particularly illuminating. Its

subject had reference to secret sin, and those sad mysteries which we hide from our nearest and dearest, and would fain conceal from our own consciousness, even forgetting that the Omniscient can detect them.  [....] [They] felt as if the preacher had crept upon them, behind his awful veil, and discovered their hoarded iniquity of deed or thought.

And this feeling compels them to stop asking him to dinner, to stop conversing with him in the street. They know that he knows that they have secret sins on their souls, sins that they successfully hide from everyone else but cannot hide -- at least not totally -- from him.

2. The veil absolutely isolates him.  If the thing we fear most is the public revelation of our secret sinful natures, then people would automatically shy away from the person they believe could reveal it. However, it does make him a better minister.  

By the aid of his mysterious emblem -- for there was no other apparent cause -- he became a man of awful power over souls that were in agony for sin. His converts always regarded him with a dread peculiar to themselves, affirming, though by figuratively, that, before he brought them to celestial light, they had been with him behind the black veil. Its gloom, indeed, enabled him to sympathize with all dark affections.

The consciousness that their minister fully understands them because he is like them, for converts who may have led sinful lives, means that they feel a great deal more comfortable with his knowledge of their sins. Because his wearing of the veil is an admission of his own guilt, theirs might seem lessened by comparison. This allows him to be more effective in his job. For others who are not comforted by the knowledge that he is aware of their secret sin, he is, at least, a more compelling figure for his own admission.

3. This story would not fall into the category of Dark Romanticism. Stories that are categorized in this way often present supernatural creatures (i.e. vampires, werewolves, etc.) as illustrative of the dark side of human nature. Further, there is nothing irrational or insane about Mr. Hooper's behavior, so it could not qualify on that front either. Just as Romanticism is more concerned with our capacity for goodness, Dark Romanticism is more concerned with our capacity for evil. This story doesn't shed light on humanity as evil, per se, but just seriously misguided (and perhaps somewhat tortured by our error).

What is the first reaction of those in the Rainbow Inn when they see Silas in the doorway in Silas Marner?

The first reaction is shock. From the very start of the novel, we are told that Silas never ventured into the Rainbow despite it being the town's public house. 

..he never strolled into the village to drink a pint at the Rainbow or to gossip at the wheelwright's; he sought no man or woman, save for the purposes of his calling, or in order to supply himself with necessaries..

Therefore the fact that Silas, of all people, shows up in a place where he has not set foot in the 15 years that he has been at Raveloe, is a big deal. The townspeople literally feel that they are staring at a ghost, and not at Silas. That is the degree of shock that they actually feel. 

This all happens in chapter 7, after Silas discovers the theft of his gold. In complete desperation Silas steps out of his cottage and ends up in the Rainbow, looking for Squire Cass and other people, to look into the theft. Being that Silas is, literally, about to have a breakdown, we get a clear description of what exactly takes place in the inn as Silas shows up in the doorway:

...the pale, thin figure of Silas Marner was suddenly seen standing in the warm light, uttering no word, but looking round at the company with his strange, unearthly eyes..

Just imagine this for a moment. Silas, who is already notorious for his big eyes, his exotic looks, and his strange personality, is just standing there looking quite distressed at the faces of the pub's frequent visitors. It is no wonder they felt it was some ethereal version of Silas that was at the door, and not the enigmatic weaver himself.

...every man present, not excepting even the skeptical farrier, had an impression that he saw, not Silas Marner in the flesh, but an apparition...

There is an awkward silence that follows for a few moments, as the shock is still fresh in those who are witnessing Silas. 

However, the landlord comes over and welcomes Silas in, clearly noticing that Silas is not well at all. When Silas requests that "the Justice—and Squire Cass—and Mr. Crackenthorp" are summoned, the landlord can tell that Silas is out of his mind. He asks Jem Rodney to calm Silas down but, in the end, the Rainbow guests simply have Silas sit down to tell them what happened. As they slowly start warming up to Silas, due to the genuine state of alarm that he showed, the feeling still remained:

The reality of ghosts remained still an open question

The people still felt uneasy and still wondered whether that was really Silas inside the Rainbow Inn.

When did the Cold War begin? Who was in the Cold War? When did the Cold War end?

We generally request that you ask only one question in each post.  However, since these three questions are so closely related and their answers are relatively short, I will answer all three.

The Cold War was a conflict between communist countries and countries that were not communist.  The United States was the most important non-communist country while the Soviet Union was the most important communist country.  Other countries were involved to a degree, but the US and the USSR were the most important countries.

There are no official beginning and ending dates for the Cold War since it was not a regular war.  Instead, it was just a general conflict or competition between the two blocs of countries.  However, we can say that the Cold War began in 1945, right after WWII ended.  (Some historians say it began in 1947.)  We can say that it ended in 1991 when the Soviet Union broke apart.

Which has more religious emphasis between Edwards's "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God" and Miller's The Crucible?

In my opinion, Edwards's sermon has more religious emphasis than Miller's The Crucible.

Religion plays an important role in both works.  However, The Crucible has other subtexts that play an equally important role.  For example, Danforth and Hathorne act with political considerations when presiding over the trials.  Putnam is driven by efforts to consolidate his land ownership.  Proctor and Elizabeth struggle with their relationship.  Religion is a weak area for them, as seen in how Proctor cannot recall the commandment about adultery.  However, their struggles also manifest in the concepts of trust, forgiveness, and unconditional love.  Even the girls dancing in the woods can be seen as rebelling against social expectations more than against religion.  Abigail is motivated by coveting Proctor more than she is by spiritual identity.  Very often, Miller's story lines connect to elements outside of issues in religion.

For Jonathan Edwards, there is nothing else but religion.  Every word in the text is related to spiritual identity, transgression, and God's forgiveness.  Edwards's sermon is intended to galvanize his audience into religious awareness: "There is nothing that keeps wicked men, at any moment, out of Hell, but the mere pleasure of God.”  The emphasis in Edwards's sermon is purely on religion.  

Arthur Miller's drama emphasizes religion, but not exclusively as Edwards's sermon does.  Miller wishes to explore different dimensions in the human experience. Jonathan Edwards sees religious relationship as the only critical element to human identity and relentlessly emphasizes it in his sermon.

Are there any historical facts that are proven with historical evidences such as quotes, photos, etc.?

In historical research, photos and primary source writings/quotes can be extremely helpful when establishing facts in history.  Photos and quotes are two types of primary sources.  All known historical information is sourced from either primary or secondary sources.  While some topics are widely recorded in secondary sources, such as wars and historical figures, others are less documented.  It is these less documented topics which can be researched using other primary sources.  We can look at photographs to learn about fashion, technology, architecture, etc. in the 19th and 20th centuries.  Quotes sourced from letters and journal entries also provide insight into how daily life was in historical times.  When doing extensive historical research, one must look at both primary and secondary sources.  Secondary sources may provide an overview of a historical topic, while primary sources can give insight into more specific details.

What is Lookwood's impression of Heathcliff in paragragh 1 of chapter 1? Is Lookwood's description of Heathcliff at this stage one of approval or...

In the first paragraph of Wuthering Heights, Lockwood strongly approves of Mr. Heathcliff, his new landlord. He says, "Mr. Heathcliff and I are such a suitable pair," and then, in a burst of enthusiasm, calls Mr. Heathcliff "a capital fellow!" (We might say, "a great guy!") Lockwood goes on to state in the same paragraph, "my heart warmed towards him...".

Yet in the second half of this opening paragraph, Emily Bronte already has begun to cast doubt on Lockwood's judgment. The reader might well question what a great guy Heathcliff is when Lockwood describes his suspicious eyes and the way he draws his fingers even further into the vest he is wearing as if recoiling when Lockwood speaks to him. Heathcliff's body language is closed off and hostile. Further,  the words "suspiciously" and "jealous" which Lockwood applies to Heathcliff might make us wonder why Lockwood "warmed" to him.

Part of Bronte's genius is her ability to very quickly get a scene going. She does so here, and from the start we recognize Mr. Lockwood as an unreliable narrator, forcing his own interpretation --what he wants to believe--on to situations even when the evidence contradicts him. 

`y = xe^(-x), y = 0, x = 2` (a) Set up an integral for the volume of the solid obtained by rotating the region bounded by the given curve...

The shell has the radius x, the cricumference is `2pi*x` and the height is `x*e^(-x)` , hence, the volume can be evaluated, using the method of cylindrical shells, such that:

`V = 2pi*int_(x_1)^(x_2) x*x*e^(-x) dx`

You need to find the next endpoint, using the equation `x*e^(-x) = 0 => x = 0`

`V = 2pi*int_0^2 x^2*e^(-x) dx`

You need to use integration by parts to evaluate the volume, such that:

`int udv = uv - int vdu`

`u = x^2 => du = 2xdx`

`dv = e^(-x) => v = -e^(-x)`

`int_0^2 x^2*e^(-x) dx = -x^2*e^(-x)|_0^2 + 2int_0^2 x*e^(-x)dx`

You need to use integration by parts to evaluate the integral `int_0^2 x*e^(-x)dx.`

`u = x => du = dx`

`dv = e^(-x) => v = -e^(-x)`

`int_0^2 x*e^(-x)dx = -x*e^(-x)|_0^2 + int_0^2 e^(-x) dx`

`int_0^2 x*e^(-x)dx = -x*e^(-x)|_0^2 - e^(-x)|_0^2`

`int_0^2 x*e^(-x)dx = -2*e^(-2) - e^(-2) +0*e^(0)+ e^(0)`

`int_0^2 x*e^(-x)dx = -2/(e^2) - 1/(e^2) + 1`

`int_0^2 x*e^(-x)dx = -3/(e^2)+ 1`

`int_0^2 x^2*e^(-x) dx = -x^2*e^(-x)|_0^2 + 2(-3/(e^2)+ 1)`

`int_0^2 x^2*e^(-x) dx = -2^2*e^(-2) - 6/(e^2) + 2`

`int_0^2 x^2*e^(-x) dx = -4/(e^2) -6/(e^2) + 2`

`int_0^2 x^2*e^(-x) dx = -10/(e^2) + 2`

`V = 2pi*(-10/(e^2) + 2)`

Hence, evaluating the volume, using the method of cylindrical shells, yields `V = 2pi*(-10/(e^2) + 2).`

Why is Sidi keen on having a bride price paid for her? What does this show about Lakunle's character?

Sidi is keen on having her bride-price paid because she mentions to Lakunle that she will be the laughing-stock of the village if it is not paid in full. Sidi tells Lakunle, "Well, do as you please. But Sidi will not make herself a cheap bowl for the village spit" (Soyinka 7). Lakunle says to Sidi that he will take the villagers' scorn, but Sidi believes that the villagers will continue to spread rumors that she was not a virgin and was forced to sell her shame. Sidi is obviously worried about her reputation in the community, and Lakunle is not concerned about Sidi's feelings. Lakunle detests traditional tribal practices, such as paying the bride-price, and refers to it as a "savage custom." He values Western civilization and modern concepts of marriage and love. His initial rebuttals make sense, and it seems like he truly believes that paying the bride-price is uncivilized and will negatively affect their relationship. Later on in the play, when Lakunle finds out that Sidi has lost her virginity, he is excited because he has a rational excuse not to pay the bride-price. The audience finds out Lakunle's true intentions, which were simply to avoid paying the bride-price because of the cost. Lakunle is rather shallow and propagates Western culture as a means to hide his true intentions.

I am giving an oral report on Shakespeare's play Antony and Cleopatra, but I don't understand what Cleopatra meant when she said:"Give me my robe,...

Cleopatra plans to commit suicide rather than be taken to Rome and paraded as a captive by Caesar. She is a queen and wants to die in a queenly manner. She obviously wants to look her best because she expects to meet Mark Antony again in the afterlife. She makes many references to seeing Antony after she dies. The Egyptians strongly believed in an afterlife, and Cleopatra is no exception. Proof that she is dressing in her best apparel for Antony is shown in the following:

Methinks I hear
Antony call. I see him rouse himself
To praise my noble act. I hear him mock
The luck of Caesar, which the gods give men
To excuse their after wrath. Husband, I come:
Now to that name my courage prove my title!

When she says "rouse himself" she means come back to life. It is significant that she calls Antony "Husband." Theirs is one of the great love stories of history.

Shakespeare is thinking of the spectacle Cleopatra's suicide will make on his stage. As usual, he uses few stage directions, but when Cleopatra orders her servants to bring her robe and put on her crown, two women will approach her and one will crown her while the other helps her into her robe. The audience knows that Cleopatra is about to commit suicide with the poisonous snakes she just procured. The spectacle will be most effective if Cleopatra is dressed like a queen when she applies two snakes to her breasts. It is a question of contrast—a beautiful queen and two snakes. Shakespeare didn't want her to look defeated and destitute but proud and noble. The opening lines prepare the audience to experience what is the most moving scene in the whole play.

Give me my robe, put on my crown; I have
Immortal longings in me.

This suicide scene is one of the most beautiful scenes Shakespeare ever wrote. Some of the lines are incredible. She picks up one of the snakes and says:

With thy sharp teeth this knot intrinsicate
Of life at once untie.

The venom takes effect immediately, and she speaks the rest of her lines in a sort of hypnotic trance. She imagines she has a baby at her breast rather than a snake. This is another example of how Shakespeare "feminizes" a male actor wearing a wig and woman's clothing.

Peace, peace!
Dost thou not see my baby at my breast,
That sucks the nurse asleep?

Then, still in a trance, she talks about the experience of dying (something we all wonder about).

As sweet as balm, as soft as air, as gentle--
O Antony! Nay, I will take thee too.

This is marvelous! When she searches for a simile for "gentle" she naturally remembers the man she loves, who could be very tender, and she cries, "O Antony!" Then when she says, "Nay, I will take thee too," she imagines the other snake is a second baby showing that it also wants to be breast-fed. She picks it up and applies it to her other breast. No doubt Shakespeare also has her put on a voluminous robe when she says, "Give me my robe," because the male actor has no breasts and will have to place both of the snakes inside the half-open robe to hide them from the audience.

Thus Shakespeare commemorates a real moment in history.

In "The Minister's Black Veil," why does Mr. Hooper wear the veil?

Mr. Hooper wears the black veil because he has come to understand a certain truth about humanity: that we are all sinful, but we attempt to hide our sinfulness from one another by holding up a figurative veil between ourselves and everyone else.  This intangible veil separates us, for as long as we live, from our fellows because we can never truly be known or know another when we attempt to hide this crucial part of what makes us human.

The first sermon Mr. Hooper preaches after he dons the veil helps to make this clearer.  Its subject is "secret sin, and those sad mysteries which we hide from our nearest and dearest, and would fain conceal from our own consciousness, even forgetting that the Omniscient can detect them."  In other words, he speaks of our secret sinfulness and the need we feel to hide that truth about ourselves, even from the people we are closest to.  We would even prefer to forget this truth ourselves, and we can almost convince ourselves that even God is unaware of our secret sins because we are so anxious to conceal them.

Would you have voted for Theodore Roosevelt in the 1912 election?

There were reasons to vote Theodore Roosevelt in the election of 1912. There were also reasons not to vote for him. I’ll explain each side so you can decide what you would have done if you had the choice to make in 1912.

In the election of 1912, Theodore Roosevelt ran as a third-party candidate. Roosevelt had hoped to secure the Republican nomination, but that nomination went to President Taft. Roosevelt believed that Taft had betrayed the ideas of the Progressive Movement as well as some of Roosevelt’s own ideas. Roosevelt believed President Taft unfairly went after big businesses. Roosevelt believed big businesses could exist as long as there was a balance between regulation of businesses and cooperation with them. When Taft went after the U.S. Steel Company, Roosevelt believed Taft destroyed that balance. Roosevelt was also dismayed that Taft removed some of the leading conservationists from government positions and replaced them with people who were less strong on conservation. When Richard Ballinger, a corporate lawyer, replaced Secretary of the Interior James Garfield, Roosevelt wasn’t happy. He also was unhappy that Gifford Pinchot was removed from his position as head of the United States Forest System. Thus, if you believed that Taft’s actions were weakening the Progressive Movement and its ideals, you would have been inclined to support Roosevelt.

Voting for Theodore Roosevelt carried some risks with it. Since most of the people who would have voted for Roosevelt would likely have voted for Taft if Roosevelt wasn’t running, voting for Roosevelt would split the Republican vote, most likely giving the election to the Democrats and Woodrow Wilson. Additionally, Roosevelt was violating the unwritten tradition of a president only serving two terms. No president had served more than two terms at this point in United States history.

Thus, people had to make a decision that carried some risk. What would you have done?

Discuss the factors that led to the rise of medieval universities, their organisation and the Muslim contribution to their development.

Medieval universities were founded in European countries such as Spain, England, Italy, and France from the 11th to 16th centuries. One of the factors that led to their rise was the earlier foundation of cathedral or monastic schools taught by monks and nuns. Pope Gregory VII instituted the so-called Gregorian Reforms during the 11th century that sought to teach the clergy Canon law as well as to verse in them in areas such as logic and finance to help them run their parishes. In addition, this type of learning helped the clergy form the necessary arguments to promote religion in Europe. Medieval universities became centers to train clergy for these purposes, and to train students in other courses of study, including arithmetic, geometry, Latin, music, astronomy, and other areas. Students and professors formed guilds or corporations, similar to other guilds, called universitas. Pope Gregory IV gave his blessing to these corporations in the 13th century, further promoting their rise. The universitas was self-regulating and free from church and civil law. 

The Muslim contribution to medieval universities was that many Arab scholars had re-discovered the works of Aristotle and other classical scholars. In addition, the Arab world had made several discoveries in medicine and technology. Their scholarship spread to Europe, furthering the development of learning and medieval universities. 

In the book We Have Always Lived In The Castle by Shirley Jackson, what do the children sing songs about?

"Merricat, said Connie, would you like a cup of tea?
Oh no, said Merricat, you'll poison me.
Merricat, said Connie, would you like to go to sleep?
Down in the boneyard ten feet deep!"

Most of the Blackwood family had been murdered (poisoned with arsenic) and the townspeople were pretty sure Constance had done it. The town collectively shunned the remaining Blackwoods, Merricat, Constance and Julian. The arsenic was in a bowl of sugar. Constance ate berries at that meal and didn't put sugar on them; Merricat was sent to her room as punishment for something and she didn't eat any either. Julian had some sugar, but just a little and he survived.

Merricat, the only surviving Blackwood to go into town for groceries and errands, would be taunted by local children with the above rhyme. Later, when somebody sets their house on fire to unsuccessfully drive them out of the town, most kids stop the taunting (one tries, but can't remember the rhyme correctly) and the villagers begin to leave food on their doorstep as a form of apology or appeasement.

Is there a part in the book where Scout prefers to play with boys rather than girls, or anything that is close to that?

Throughout the book we see several examples of this, actually. Let's look at a few:

• Scout and Jem are very close. She is very much a tomboy because she has grown up in a home with a single father and one older brother. Much of her playtime is spent with Jem and their games are more masculine than feminine.


• Scout's closest friend (outside of the family) her age is Dill, a boy. She looks forward to every summer when he will come to visit. They spend all of their time playing together—until the trial that is.


• Scout does not have any friends who are girls, nor do we see her associating with them at school except on a superficial basis. She does not go to their parties nor play with them at school.


• Scout shows no interest in anything some girls would like—tea parties, dresses, dress up,  dolls, and so on. The games she plays all involve (much to Aunt Alexandra's dismay) her playing in a shirt and pants, and often no shoes. These clothes allow her to play rougher than girls are expected to play, and to get messy—again, not something girls were supposed to be doing.


• She seems comfortable around males and, at times, confused by females.

I was more at home in my father's world... [where men] did not trap you with innocent questions to make fun of you. Ladies seemed to live in faint horror of men, seemed unwilling to approve wholeheartedly of them. But I liked them... there was something about them that I instinctively liked... they weren't-- "Hypocrites..." (Chapter 24)

When Iago warns Othello that Brabantio is "much beloved" and may try to separate him and Desdemona, what is Othello's answer, and what does it...

"Let him do his spite:
My services which I have done the signiory
Shall out-tongue his complaints."

This is Othello's instant response to Iago's concern (which, of course, is all a lie) about his and Desdemona's marriage. Othello believes that Desdemona's father, Brabantio, can do nothing to him or to his marriage because he is convinced that his reputation as a general and all the great acts he has performed for the Venetian military will outweigh any slanderous accusation that Brabantio can throw at him. 

His self-confidence turns out to be justified since the Duke of Venice concludes that there was nothing wrong in Othello's actions and that he did not, as Brabantio swore, use magic or potions to ensnare Desdemona. However, this intense belief in his own righteousness turns out to be, quite literally, Othello's fatal flaw throughout the course of this play.

Right here, at the beginning of the story, we see evidence of Othello's own powerful bias towards himself. A few lines after his assertion that his deeds as a general will have great standing with the Duke, he tells Iago that he truly loves Desdemona and says,

"I would not my unhoused free condition
Put into circumscription and confine
For the sea's worth."

He states that he would not give up his freedom for anything less than absolute love. These several lines are telling, because like every best man in every modern movie about a wedding, he seems to consider marriage to be a great burden, or at least a confining existence. This subtly sets up the idea that Othello doesn't properly appreciate Desdemona and their love. 

Othello's self-righteousness and failure to believe that others can be as great and righteous as he ends up being his downfall. Iago's deceptions only work so well because Othello has no faith in others, particularly in the loyalty of his wife. He declares boldly throughout the play that he loves Desdemona greatly, and even though she chooses him over her own father, he refuses to believe in her fidelity at the end. Ultimately, his inability to trust his wife results in him murdering her and subsequently killing himself.

In "The Cask of Amontillado," how does Montresor interact with the other characters?

There are not many characters in Poe's The Cask of Amontillado, but there are a few: aside from Montresor, there is Fortunato, Luchesi is mentioned by name only, and Montresor's absent servants.

I will save Fortunato for last, as he is the most important of the three other characters. We do not get to see Montresor interacting with Luchesi, but we can assume that he at least knows that Luchesi will serve as a good driving factor for Fortunato. The interaction between Montresor and his attendants is told to us after it was supposed to happen, but it still shows us how manipulative Montresor is because he told his servants not to leave the house while knowing full well that they would do the opposite of what he asked.

The biggest piece of information we learn about Montresor through his interactions with the other characters is that he is manipulative, which is very evident in his interactions with Fortunato. Montresor spends the entire story manipulating Fortunato all the way to the unfortunate man's death.

I will elaborate a little further on Montresor's interactions with Fortunato. Although we know that Montresor's intention for the evening is to kill Fortunato, Montresor treats Fortunato with the utmost politeness: he greets him pleasantly, shows reluctance to interrupt Fortuanto's partying, and shows concern about Fortunato's health. All of his actions are fake, but he plays the part of good friend very well because Fortunato does not expect a thing. Even as he is sealing Fortunato in the recess in the wall, he keeps up the pleasant charade, not saying a thing about what he is doing and merely continuing to assure Fortunato that the Amontillado is there; not once does he break character to tell Fortunato why he is doing this, or that there is actually no Amontillado, or even that Fortunato is about to die.

In To Kill a Mockingbird, who is Sunday's offering being taken up for and why?

In Chapter 12, Calpurnia takes Jem and Scout to First Purchase African M.E. Church. At the end of the sermon, Reverend Sykes takes up a collection. After the congregation has given their tithe, Reverend Sykes counts the money and says that there is not enough. Reverend Sykes says that they need at least ten dollars to support Helen Robinson and her children while Tom is on trial. Since Tom cannot work, and Helen has to stay home with the children, the family has no income. Reverend Sykes tells Alec to shut the doors and won't allow anyone to leave until they have collected ten dollars. Reverend Sykes urges everyone to give another dime and even calls out a member of the congregation who did not give money towards the collection. Eventually, the congregation raises ten dollars for Helen Robinson and her children. Scout and Jem gain perspective into how the African American community supports each other.

List the four chambers in an animal's heart.

A four-chamber heart is composed of two atria and two ventricles. The function of each chamber is briefly described below.

• Oxygen-poor blood that has been used by the cells is delivered back to the heat via the right atrium.


• The right atrium pumps this oxygen-depleted blood to the right ventricle.


• The right ventricle then pumps the blood to lungs, where oxygen is received.


• The oxygenated blood is brought back to the heart via the pulmonary veins.


• The pulmonary veins lead the blood to the left atrium.


• The left atrium pumps this oxygen-rich blood to the left ventricle.


• The left ventricle then pumps the oxygenated blood to the body.

The oxygen in the blood is then used by the mitochondria of the eukaryotic cells in a process known as cellular respiration. During cellular respiration, oxygen gas and the sugar glucose are converted into water, carbon dioxide gas, and an energy source called adenosine triphosphate (ATP).

What is the main reason Phoenix Jackson keeps talking to herself?

In Eudora Welty's story "A Worn Path," the character Phoenix Jackson is an old woman who makes a yearly journey into town. Along the way, she encounters animals, dangerous roads, and a white hunter. Although we don't know how old Phoenix is, we can assume she is probably close to 100. As she walks along the path, she talks to herself through tough spots in the road: "Up through the pines," and "Now down through the oaks." She also asks a scarecrow, "Who you watching?" Phoenix may talk to herself because she is old or becoming senile; she may also talk to herself because she is lonely. However, the main reason she talks to herself is to help get through the journey she makes--it helps her navigate the wilderness as she makes the trip on her own. 

Explain what the "butterfly effect" is, give an example of your own, and retell how Bradbury used it in "The Sound of Thunder."

You are asking about one of my favorite topics ever.  Time travel and paradox consequences.  I'm a real nerd for that topic.  The "butterfly effect" is simply this.  Small changes in the past can create massive changes in the future.  Bradbury is not the first person to suggest that kind of past/future correlation, and interestingly enough, Bradbury is not credited with making the phrase "butterfly effect" famous either.  That credit goes to Edward Lorenz.  Lorenz was a meteorologist during the mid 1900's.  During one of his weather model simulations, Lorenz changed a minuscule amount of data in the prediction model.  The result was a completely different outcome than the original model.  Lorenz then made the imaginative connection that a single flap of a butterfly wing could change an entire weather pattern -- thus, the butterfly effect.  A small change in one location, creates drastic differences elsewhere.  

In Bradbury's story, "A Sound of Thunder," Eckels steps off of the path while hunting dinosaurs millions of years ago.  Unfortunately, his foot stepped on and killed a butterfly.  That butterfly's entire line of descendants were instantly wiped out, which cancelled out any interactions they might have had with anything else in the world.  The result was that the language in Eckels own time was changed and the system of government was altered as well.  

His face was cold. His mouth trembled, asking: “Who - who won the presidential election yesterday?”

The man behind the desk laughed. “You joking? You know very well. Deutscher, of course! Who else? Not that fool weakling Keith. We got an iron man now, a man with guts!”

For my own example, I like to use the original Back to the Future movie.  In that movie, Marty McFly changes one small event with his father.  His mom then falls in love with Marty instead of his father, and Marty starts slowly disappearing from the world.  

A different example is my favorite paradox.  It's called the grandfather paradox.  Suppose that you went back in time and killed your grandfather before he had a chance to have your father.  That means with no father of your own, you don't exist.  Right?  Well, if that is the case, then who went back in time to kill your grandfather? 

Each of the following questions references Shakespearean sonnets: 1. How many syllables are in each line? 2. What is the rhyme scheme ? 3. Find...

We have a Shakespeare's Sonnets tutor online right now to help you!

To chat with a tutor, please set up a tutoring profile by creating an account and setting up a payment method. If you initiate a chat, please note you will be charged $0.50 a minute for tutoring time.

How can I analyze the poem "By The Seaside" by William Wordsworth?

English poet laureate for most of the 19th century, William Wordsworth was considered the premier Romantic poet in English literature. His poems tend to focus on nature and he spent most of his life living in the one of the most beautiful areas of England, the Lake District.

"By the Seaside" is essentially a poem about nature, but like most of Wordsworth's poems, it is about what nature can do for the soul. As the speaker looks out on the sea at dusk he sees the calm after a storm:

The sun is couched, the sea-fowl gone to rest, 
And the wild storm hath somewhere found a nest....

Later in the poem, Wordsworth contrasts this scene with the commerce of ships on the ocean which disturb the tranquility:

Where, now, the ships that drove before the blast, 
Threatened by angry breakers as they passed; 
And by a train of flying clouds bemocked; 
Or, in the hollow surge, at anchor rocked....

He speaks of English ships that travel to Norway, the Baltic and Calabria, on the Italian coast, and hopes that they will once again see the "benign" British waters. The final lines see the return of the ships and he urges a thank you to God for safe passage:

Ye mariners, that plough your onward way, 
Or in the haven rest, or sheltering bay, 
May silent thanks at least to God be given 
With a full heart; "our thoughts are 'heard' in heaven."

The poem is written in iambic pentameter, meaning each line contains five stressed syllables and five unstressed syllables. The first 32 lines are written in couplets followed by a tercet and finishing with two more couplets. An example of personification is when Wordsworth says, "the wild storm hath somewhere found a nest."

What would be a plot diagram for the novel Night by Elie Wiesel?

Since Night by Elie Wiesel is really more of a non-fiction memoir than a novel, it does not follow the normal fiction plot structure. However, it is written much like a novel, so if I were to fit it into that plot structure this is how I would probably do it:

The exposition is contained in the very beginning of the book. We are introduced to the characters. We meet Elie and his family which consists of his parents and three sisters, we meet Moshe the Beadle and a few of the other people of Elie's hometown, Sighet, during WWII (setting). During the exposition we learn that Elie is interested in studying Cabbala (Jewish mysticism) and finds a teacher in Moshe.

The conflict is made evident pretty quickly. WWII has been raging for a few years now, and the townspeople of Sighet hope it will be over before it reaches them. However, soon the foreigners in the town are taken by the Nazis, and Moshe is among them. He is able to escape and makes it back to Sighet only to have the people there think he is crazy. They refuse to believe his account of what is happening to the Jews.

Next, the rising action occurs when Nazis come into town. They move the Jews into areas called ghettos, where the people soon find out that the next step will be deportation. They are forced onto cattle trains and ride for three days with little food and water all the while listening to Madame Schacter scream about fire.

The climax is really a series of events from the time the Jews arrive at Birkenau, Elie and his father go from there to Auschwitz to Buna, and Elie tells of the horrors they encounter.

The falling action probably begins about the time Elie has to have surgery on his foot. Soon after that, Buna is liquidated, and Elie along with his father and the other prisoners begin a death march toward Gleiwitz. On this horrific journey, Elie and his father help one another keep going. Eventually, they reach yet another concentration camp--Buchenwald.

Finally, the resolution happens. Elie is guilt-ridden when his father dies, even though he knows there is nothing he could have done to save him. The camp is finally liberated in April of 1945, and this horrible journey is over for Elie Wiesel.

The barbed wire fence is a physical separation between Bruno and Shmuel. What other types of separation does the fence represent in this story?

The fence in the novel The Boy in the Striped Pajamas is symbolic of several different forms of separation. The fence can symbolize the difference in ethnicities, one being Jewish, the other being German. Jews were separated from Germans and forbidden from interacting with the general population under the Nazi regime. This separation is portrayed by the long fence around the Auschwitz concentration camp that confines the Jews inside the fence. The fence separates civil society from inhumane lawlessness. On Bruno's side, he is treated with compassion and lives in a relatively comfortable, safe environment. Shmuel lives in constant fear, where the Nazi guards are void of morality. Violence and intimidation are commonplace on the Jewish side of the fence, and hundreds of Jews are slaughtered at random times throughout the day. The fence can also symbolize a barrier between hope and doom. The Jews are doomed and live with the reality that they will more than likely die in the camp. On the other side of the fence, Bruno and his family members feel confident that they can impact their own future. This is evident by their decision to travel back to Berlin. The most obvious separation that the fence represents is that of freedom and oppression. The Jews are oppressed on their side of the fence and are forbidden to leave Auschwitz. They have no say or control over their daily lives. Unlike the prisoners, the Germans are free to travel and have the convenience of pursuing their own individual happiness.

What devices are used in "The Man He Killed"?

The first poetic device Hardy uses is rhyme. The scheme is ABAB. The shortness of the lines and the repetitive rhyme scheme gives the poem an easy cadence, making it easy to recite and remember, and gives it a fun type of lightness. The lightness is significant because the subject matter is both dark and light. The infantryman gives a monologue in which he suggests that if he had met his enemy at a bar, they would have been friends. 

The famous line of the poem is an understatement: "quaint and curious war is!" The use of understatement (opposite of hyperbole) goes along with the lightness of the poem. And, of course, it undercuts or makes light of the fact that war is deadly. One could say that Hardy is being sarcastic or ironic here because war is certainly not "quaint." Quaint can mean bizarre or interesting, but often in an old-fashioned way. War is bizarre but in a violent way. So, to downplay war as quaint and curious is a kind of "verbal irony." This is when the speaker intends a meaning different from the one he expresses. Hardy says war is quaint and curious but within the context of the poem, he is making the point that it is devastating. He makes this point by using a contrast between the two situations: the two men at a bar vs. the two men on the battlefield. 

A ball initially at rest is dropped from a height y above the floor and it hits the floor after 1.5 s. From what height should the ball be dropped...

The equation relating height to time for an object in free fall is

`h = 1/2 g t^2`

where h is height, g is acceleration due to gravity and t is time. Since time is a squared factor of height, for the object to take twice as long to strike the floor it must be dropped from four times the height, or h = 4y.

It's easy enough to calculate the two heights to see this. I'll use 10 m/s^2 for acceleration due to gravity:

y = (1/2)(10 m/s^2)(1.5 s)^2 = 11.25 meters

second height: h = (1/2)(10 m/s^s)(3 sec) = 45 m

45/11.25 = 4, so the second height is four times y

You could also solve this by canceling out the factors that are the same in both scenarios, 1/2 g:

`(h_1)/(t_1)^2 = (h_2)/(t_2)^2`  so `(h_2)/(h_1) = (t_2)^2/(t_1)^2`

Therefore the factor by which the height changes is the square of the factor by which the time changes.

What is the narrator's point of view toward Ozymandias?

Percy Bysshe Shelly's "Ozmandias" is an example of the narrator as a first person observer, an active voice in the poem, who nonetheless does not directly inject his personal opinion into the poem. The narrator is present in the poem, yet remains observational, creating the necessary distance required to allow the reader to judge for him or herself what is occurring within the poem. 

The reader is presented with an ancient statue sitting in desert sands.              

"Two vast and trunkless legs of stone                                                      Stand in the desert."

The statue is obviously in disarray, ravaged by time.  It is the statue of a once great king, now strew across a desolate landscape.

"And on the pedestal these words appear:
'My name is OZYMANDIAS, King of Kings.
Look on my works ye Mighty, and despair!'
Nothing beside remains."

The narrator's point of view is the point of view of a dispassionate observer, which makes the impact of the poem so much the greater. The narrator makes no comment on Ozmandias, and merely allows the facts presented within the poem to powerfully speak for themselves.

Foxwood farm symbolizes what country?

Foxwood farm is supposed to represent England. The characterization of it as being somewhat unkempt and its borders not so tidy connects to the way the sprawling British Empire had begun to unravel a bit prior to World War II and would only continue to do so.

This is in contrast to the other farm, tightly run and very efficient that is supposed to represent Germany.

Pilkington, the somewhat bumbling farmer who owns Foxwood Farms, is supposed to represent British politicians. Eventually, Foxwood farms and Pilkington are allied with Animal Farm and Mr. Pilkington works with Napoleon. The final scene of the pigs playing cards with Pilkington and cheating each other represents the way that the alliance turned into one more conflict once the war was over.

In The Kite Runner, what physical scars does Amir bear from his fight with Assef? Which is the most significant and why?

Amir is lucky to be alive after his encounter with Assef, and he has sustained some serious physical damage.  His ruptured spleen had to be removed, he has several broken ribs, and his lung has been punctured.  One of his eye socket bones has been fractured, and he has many cuts.  He has also lost a tooth.  The surgery to remove his spleen and to treat the punctured lung will leave scars, certainly.  But the major laceration was to his upper lip, in its middle, which had to be sewn back together. This is the scar that is of great significance in the story.

Early in the story, we learn that Hassan was born with what is called a "harelip."  This is a split lip, a birth defect.  He is made fun of by others because of this, and Baba finally pays for this to be fixed surgically, and Hassan is left with "just a pink jagged line running up from his lip" (47).  This "gift" to Hassan leaves Amir envious, thinking, "I wished I too had some kind of scar that would beget Baba's sympathy" (46).  He has always felt a sense of competition with Hassan for Baba's affection, without any realization of the undercurrents around him, since he does not know that Hassan is Baba's son, too, something he learns much later in the story, before he has his encounter with Assef. 

Now, Amir has a scar like Hassan's, and he realizes that he has gotten what he wished for those many years ago, thinking to himself, "Clean down the middle. Like a harelip" (297).  Now, although Baba and Hassan are gone, Amir has the same scar, providing Amir with a physical manifestation of his brotherhood with Hassan. So, not only is this scar a badge of honor, representing his fight to save Sohrab, Hassan's son, but also it is a badge of his brotherhood with Hassan. 

How can Shakespeare's "Much Ado About Nothing" relate to modern audiences?

Everyone enjoys a good love story, or at least most people do. Even if one's name is Benedick or Beatrice, one might eventually conclude that all sexual bravado, drenched in barbed innuendo, is a mere denial of latent desires. At least, that's what many critics think about the Beatrice and Benedick 'side' story.

In regard to Claudio and Hero, however, we know that 'the course of true love never did run smooth.' Modern audiences know that any good love story is filled with initial conflict which resolves itself as the story approaches denouement. Even if we have not experienced drama in our relationships, many of us probably know a couple who are definitely attracted to one another, but choose to deny this attraction. In Much Ado About Nothing, Shakespeare has chosen to address transcendent and timeless themes of gender conflict, infidelity, unrequited love, and the role of deceit in romance. As such, the sexual tension between Benedick and Beatrice is nothing new, and this tension is often highlighted in modern romances.

Additionally, the ambiguity surrounding Hero's sexual purity (due to the machinations of the sly Don John) plays upon the modern male's fear of female infidelity. In the play, Shakespeare also takes aim at the practice of deception in the context of love. When the masked Beatrice denounces Benedick to another masked man, she has no idea that the masked man she is complaining to is actually Benedick himself. Meanwhile, Don Pedro, masked himself, tries to woo Hero on Claudio's behalf. A modern audience can certainly relate to the idea of utilizing emotional masks to disguise certain perceived inadequacies from potential mates.

The relevance of Shakespeare's themes in Much Ado About Nothing is further highlighted in a number of adaptations of the play in modern cinema. Here are a few:

Joss Whedon's 2013 Much Ado About Nothing.

Kenneth Branagh's 1993 adaptation.

Dil Chahta Hai, the Bollywood version, loosely based on Much Ado About Nothing. This link also includes examples of modern movies based on the Bard's play.

With all the fanfare about romance, Much Ado About Nothing certainly lays bare all the maddeningly delicious challenges the pursuit of love entails in our modern world.

In chapter ten of The Lord of the Flies, the tiny assembly still uses the conch. Why?

Chapter ten is titled "The Shell and the Glasses" for good reason. The chapter opens with Piggy squinting to see through the one good lens in his spectacles. Ralph approaches both Piggy and the conch without any real purpose in mind and Piggy asks him to call an assembly since Ralph is still chief. Ralph laughs as he caresses the conch shell, a symbol of order and the civility that used to rule the island. Ralph, dealing with the previous night's activity, keeps hammering home to Piggy that what they did to Simon was murder. 

By the end of chapter ten, Piggy's specs are gone, stolen by Jack and his hunters in a raid. The shell remains, useless, just like the civilization that it symbolized. In chapter eleven, Ralph, Piggy, and the twins take the conch to Jack in an attempt to repair the fractured group, regain some sense of order, and return the spectacles to Piggy. They attempt to appeal to the rational and orderly side of the boys: 

"Let me speak." He was standing in the dust of the fight, and as the tribe saw his intention the shrill cheer changed to a steady booing. Piggy held up the conch and the booing sagged a little, then came up again to strength. "I got the conch! He shouted. "I tell you, I got the conch!" (180)

Piggy and the conch are summarily destroyed by Roger and the latent savagery within the boys. The conch, a symbol for the society and rules that once governed the boys' lives, is crushed to pieces. Ralph and Piggy's hopes that bringing the conch along would remind the others about how to behave appropriately are dashed to pieces along with it. 

I am writing an essay on "A Modest Proposal" by Jonathan Swift. I am trying to demonstrate how he uses the persona (the humanitarian etc.) to front...

In this essay, Swift creates a persona or character, often called the Proposer. It's important to note that Swift is not this narrator. The narrator or Proposer is a clueless man Swift has created in order to satirize (make fun of) people--such as economists, mathemeticians and other rationalists of his era--who understood the problems of poverty only in economic terms. This clueless persona, the Proposer (we might also call him The Rationalist), innocently misleads the reader into thinking he is a humane individual who wants to devise a compassionate solution to the problem of poverty in Ireland. In the early part of the essay, he describes the poor in moving terms, talking about mothers begging in the streets with their children in rags trailing after them, depicting young men so famished that when they do get work the labor kills them, and mentioning the dire alternatives the poor face, such as starvation or selling themselves into slavery. Thus, we as readers are shocked to find this Proposer, though apparently sincere, can't seem to comprehend that the "poor" he wants to help are actually fully human. He proposes a purely economic solution: having the mothers of the poor fatten their babies so they can be sold as food to wealthy landowners. Through creating a persona of the Rationalist, who, though wanting to be compassionate, can't get past seeing "the poor" as widgets or economic units, Swift hoped to shock readers into a genuinely compassionate response to the problem of poverty. 

What is the meaning of the phrase "tomb-like" in the story "The Pedestrian"?

Mr. Mead, the pedestrian in Ray Bradbury’s short story, is describing the houses he passes each night on his walks around town. He describes the houses as dark “tombs” and the streets as being like graveyards as he meanders around the “dead” town. All the citizens, except for Mead, are in their homes watching television. They aren’t enjoying life but have given themselves over to the mindless entertainment provided by the 100 or more channels on television. They have metaphorically sealed themselves off from the world (like in a tomb) and are no longer “living.” Mead also comments that he sometimes sees ghostly shadows go across the walls in the houses created by the reflection of the television in the dark homes. 

Bradbury’s use of a recurring death motif through his descriptions of the homes and streets shows his fear that we are giving our lives over to technology. His predictions in the 1950s were unbelievable in how he foreshadowed the effects of television and the media in our daily lives today. 

Calculate the subatomic particles for isotopes: Al

Subatomic particles are small particles found in atoms. The three main subatomic particles are protons, neutrons, and electrons.

Isotopes are different forms of the same element. The isotopes of an element are different from one another because they have different numbers of neutrons. Because they have different numbers of neutrons, they also have different masses. 

There are three main isotopes of aluminum. We can indicate the isotopes for aluminum by using two different isotope symbols as shown below.

Aluminum-26 OR `~^26_13Al`

Aluminum-27 OR `~^27_13Al`

Aluminum-28 OR `~^28_13Al` ` `

In the first version, the name of the element is followed by a dash and a number. The number is equal to the mass of the isotope.

In the second version, two numbers are written in front of the element symbol. The top number is equal to the mass of the isotope. The bottom number is equal to the atomic number of the element.

Calculating Protons, Neutrons, and Electrons:

• 
  # Protons: The number of protons is always equal to the atomic number of the element. When you are using the second isotope symbol shown above, the atomic number is the bottom number. So, the number of protons is equal to the bottom number in the symbol. When you are using the first isotope symbol shown above, the atomic number is not indicated. In this case, you will need to use a periodic table to find the atomic number.

• 
  # Electrons: If the isotope is neutral (i.e. does not have a charge), the number of electrons is also equal to the atomic number. So, the number of electrons is equal to the number of protons.

• 
  # Neutrons: The mass number is indicated in both of the isotope symbols show above. The mass number is equal to the number of protons plus the number of neutrons. Therefore, the number of neutrons can be calculated by subtracting the number of protons from the mass number.

Each of the isotopes of aluminum would have the following numbers of protons, neutrons, and electrons.

Aluminum-26 OR : 13 protons, 13 electrons, 13 neutrons (26 - 13)

Aluminum-27 OR : 13 protons, 13 electrons, 14 neutrons (27 - 13)

Aluminum-28 OR : 13 protons, 13 electrons, 15 neutrons (28 - 13)

This quote is an example of which literary device: "It's like watching someone caught in an electric fence twitching and squirming and very...

The literary device used in this part of the novel Speak is called a simile. A simile is a comparison between two unlike things (people, places, events, sensations, etc). Unlike a metaphor, which also compares two unlike things, a simile does so using the words "like" or "as."

Some examples of similes:

"Her heart expanded like an exploding star when she saw her boyfriend rescue the puppy from the tree."

"The squat pen rests, snug as a gun" This one is from Seamus Heaney's excellent poem "Digging")

Authors use similes, and other figurative language, to bring their writing to life and help readers feel immersed in the story. Similes and metaphors in particular can have two opposing functions: to make a new and strange thing more familiar to the audience and to provide a new or strange viewpoint on a familiar or cliche thing.

What is the central theme or the main theme of "The Yellow Wallpaper?"

The primary theme of "The Yellow Wallpaper" is that women who are suffering from post-partum depression, or any kind of depression, should be respected and allowed to make decisions regarding their own lifestyle and health. The rapid decline that Jane experiences under her husband's care and watchfulness and "the rest cure" could have been prevented if John had listened to Jane's desires. Jane wants to write, which would have certainly been a healthy pursuit for her if she had been allowed to do it openly. If others had taken an interest in her writing, that would have boosted her self-esteem. Perhaps she could have written about the sadness she felt, and getting it down on paper in a way that she could share with others might have been a tonic for her. Only being able to write on the sly turns her legitimate desire to express herself inward, exacerbating her dark thoughts.

Jane also expresses the desire to go visiting, but her husband squashes the idea, assuming it would be too hard on her. Seeing friends could have done wonders for her psychological state, but John is perhaps too embarrassed that his wife is suffering from a "nervous" condition to allow her to appear in public and possibly damage his reputation as a physician.

Jane's original complaints about her environment should have been heeded, as well. She did not seem to be in favor of the move to the country house, and she detested the wallpaper. Surely a small investment in making the room cheerful and attractive was not too much to ask, yet her requests for changes in living arrangements were consistently ignored. 

John generally treats Jane with a lack of respect. When she tries to express herself, he often laughs at her or cuts her off. He manages to do this in a way that seems kind, making his control over her all the more egregious because she feels ungrateful for balking at his rules. Having a husband and doctor who respected her as a complete person, not as some childish half-wit, could have spared her the plunge into insanity that she experiences at the end of the story. 

Often authors leave it to readers to determine the themes of their stories. In the case of this story, however, we are blessed with a specific explanation from Charlotte Perkins Gilman of her purpose in writing the story. You can see her explanation at the link below. Ms. Gilman suffered from "melancholia" herself and was prescribed the rest cure; she knew first-hand how destructive it was. She wrote the story as a way to encourage doctors to stop prescribing it and to bring attention to its dangers. She was able to return to a normal state of mind because a "wise friend" respected her and helped her pursue her own instincts about what she needed to do. Gilman left a powerful illustration of how important it is for women to be respected. 

How does the title of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice relate to Darcy's proposal and Elizabeth's response?

The title of Jane Austen's Pride and Prejudice reflects the the dominant theme of pride found in Darcy's proposal speech to Elizabeth and the prejudice found in both her reply and in her overall judgement of his character.

As we learn in Darcy's letter to Elizabeth, Darcy had rightly judged the Bennet family to be beneath his own breeding and dignity. One reason why he feels the Bennet family is beneath him is because Mrs. Bennet comes from the working class, whereas Darcy has nobility in his family line. But, more importantly, he sees that the Bennet family members behave in ways that are beneath high social standing; they act with impropriety. Specifically, both Kitty and Lydia our outrageous flirts, and Mary tries to draw unwarranted attention to herself, as seen in her insistence on playing the piano at the Netherfield ball. In addition, their mother is a vain gossip, and, worse yet, their father does nothing to check the behavior of his family members. As a result of judging the Bennet family to be beneath him since he takes great pride in his own virtuous behavior, Darcy felt it necessary to express his own pride in his proposal speech to Elizabeth, as we see in Austen's following narration:

He spoke well; but there were feelings besides those of the heart to be detailed; and he was not more eloquent on the subject of tenderness than of pride. His sense of her inferiority--of its being a degradation--of the family obstacles which judgement had always opposed to inclination, were dwelt on with a warmth which seemed due to the consequence he was wounding, but was very unlikely to recommend his suit. (Ch. 34)

Though Darcy speaks truths, Elizabeth had already formed a prejudiced opinion of Darcy's character, and her prejudices blind her to the truth of what he is saying. Elizabeth formed a prejudiced opinion of him the moment he snubbed her and all company at the Meryton assembly. Her prejudiced opinion was further solidified when she chose to believed Mr. Wickham's version of why he and Darcy are no longer cordial and still further when she learned Darcy had discouraged Bingley from proposing to Jane. It's due to her prejudices that Elizabeth responds to his proposal by attacking his character. As the novel progresses and Darcy begins to show how genuinely caring his nature really is, Elizabeth realizes just how prejudicially she had judged Darcy.

How does Robinson Crusoe get provisions such as guns and gunpowder?

Robinson Crusoe finds himself the sole survivor of a shipwreck, stranded on a deserted island. Intrepid and resourceful, he quickly realizes that if he is to survive, he needs to salvage as much as possible from the wrecked ship, which he can see has floated toward him and is not entirely submerged. He manages to get back to the ship using the life boat on which he and his now dead friends escaped from the ship during the storm that started all his current troubles. On board the ship, he finds guns and gunpowder, among other supplies. He is able to fashion a raft to return him to the shore with his supplies. The gunpowder helps him become the "king" of his island. Throughout the book, he will find ingenious ways to overcome his problems and create a new life for himself.

Why shouldn't have Frankenstein created his creature in the first place?

Prior to his decision to create the monster, Victor had been warned previously by his father and later by his professor. They both wondered why he wasted his time reading and researching about useless information. However, Victor became interested with the creation of life, science and the supernatural. He learned much later that his pursuit with regards to the creation of life was beyond his nature. He had acquired the knowledge to restore animation by bestowing life to a lifeless body.

Victor did not consider the nature of his creation, he assumed that his creation would be good and would pave the way for further research in the science of creation that he had developed. Victor had not established the methods of controlling his creation which forced him to run away when he first saw it move.

In summary, Victor knew he was creating an abomination, something he was not supposed to do. This knowledge did not stop his pursuits, instead he justified his reasons and went ahead to commit a mistake that would haunt him for the rest of his life.

What are the clauses of the bet and what happens when the bet is over?

When the banker and the lawyer agree to make a bet, they stipulate the following conditions:

1. For the duration of the bet (fifteen years), the lawyer shall live in a lodge in the banker's garden and shall not have any contact with the outside world. This includes hearing a human voice and receiving newspapers and letters.


2. The lawyer shall have access to books, musical instruments, wine, cigarettes and is permitted to write letters.


3. The lawyer will receive these goods through a little window in the lodge.


4. The lawyer shall be in confinement for "exactly" fifteen years: that is, "from twelve o'clock of November 14, 1870, and ending at twelve o'clock of November 14, 1885."


5. If the lawyer tries to break any of these conditions, he immediately forfeits all of the prize money.

At the end of the fifteen years, however, the lawyer agrees to leave the lodge a few hours early. He deliberately makes himself the loser of the bet and does this because he is no longer interested in winning the money. This comes as a great relief to the banker who would have become bankrupt, had the lawyer succeeded.

In Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery," is the lottery a collective act of murder?

The lottery is collective murder because everyone in the town acts as a mob, choosing one person at random to kill a year.

There is no one person who is the evil genius at work in this village.  No serial killer is preying on these poor people.  They consent to the entire thing.  The people of this village are so beholden to tradition that it is stronger than both human dignity and common sense.  They value tradition over life.

The lottery is a fundamental part of the fabric of village life.  Consider Old Man Warner’s response to the rumor that nearby villages are discontinuing their lottery.

Old Man Warner snorted. "Pack of crazy fools," he said. "Listening to the young folks, nothing's good enough for them. Next thing you know, they'll be wanting to go back to living in caves, nobody work any more, live hat way for a while. …. There's always been a lottery… 

He never gives a reason why there should be a lottery, or the purpose for it.  He never questions the killing. He just says that there has always been a lottery, and that means there should always be one.

The town is even afraid to replace the black box and the three-legged stool.  Everything must remain exactly the same.  Even when Tessie’s name is called, the complaints she makes are not that the lottery is wrong, but that the process was somehow unfair this time. 

People began to look around to see the Hutchinsons. Bill Hutchinson was standing quiet, staring down at the paper in his hand. Suddenly. Tessie Hutchinson shouted to Mr. Summers. "You didn't give him time enough to take any paper he wanted. I saw you. It wasn't fair!" 

Tessie is told to be a “good sport.”  If that isn’t crazy enough, they even give her very young son pebbles to throw at her so he can take part in the public stoning of his mother.  No one avoids the lottery.  Both the very young and the very old participate and no one asks questions.  That is state-sanctioned collective murder for no reason at all.

Why did Cherry and Marcia leave their dates in The Outsiders?

Cherry and Marcia left their dates because they brought alcohol.

Cherry and Marcia are Soc girls.  They do not approve of their boyfriends’ methods.  The boys get drunk too often, and get violent.  Cherry and Marcia explain that they left their dates because of this.

Oh, yeah, we found out why they were without a car. They'd come with their boyfriends, but walked out on them when they found out the boys had brought some booze along. The boys had gotten angry and left. (Ch. 2)

Socs and greasers do not usually hang out together.  There are very specific class distinctions between the two gangs.  They are often fighting, and the Socs have a tendency to jump greasers who are alone and not defended by their gang.  However, the main problem that Cherry has with her boyfriend Bob is his drinking.

Bob comes up to Cherry and tells her that he is only a little drunk.

Cherry looked mad. "A little? You call reeling and passing out in the streets 'a little'? Bob, I told you, I'm never going out with you while you're drinking, and I mean it. Too many things could happen while you're drunk. It's me or the booze." (Ch. 3)

Cherry does not want to get into the car with Bob, but she does because she does not want to cause a fight when the Socs see the girls with greasers.  Pony and Johnny are ready to fight, and she can see that.  Unfortunately, the Socs come back later and find Johnny and Pony in the park.

Later, Randy explains to Pony that Bob's parents were too lenient with him.  They let him get away with anything, and did not get involved even when he came home drunk.  He is a spoiled rich kid.

The incident at the movies snowballs into the disaster that sends Johnny and Pony on the run.  Bob and his friends jump Pony and Johnny in the park, and Johnny kills Bob to prevent him from killing Pony.  Neither of them wanted to kill anyone, even a Soc, but it was self-defense.

Which planet had the first moon?

Most of what we have available on the subject of the first moon in our solar system relates to the timeline of the formation of the first planet.  The idea is that the first moons were the ones around the first planets.  The first planets to form in our solar system were the Gas Giants.  They formed even before the Sun began nuclear reactions at 50 million years after the beginning of the 0.0-year Pre-solar Nebula Era, according to NASA's Goddard Space and Flight Center.  At about 10 million years after 0.0-year, the gas planets Jupiter, then Saturn formed during the Gas Giant Era. Jupiter and Saturn both have multiple moons (with Saturn perhaps in the process of birthing a new moon).  Jupiter has no lack of moons, both large and small, with 14 large ones alone. Two of the most important of Jupiter's moons are Europa and Ganymede, both about 4.5 billion years old, which is about the same age as Jupiter itself. Saturn has an abundance of moons as well, with 53 that are classed as "official" and 9 that are classed as "provisional."  If it is correct to theorize that the first moon (or simultaneously appearing moons) appeared with the first planet, then it can be said that the first moon or moons appeared around Jupiter because this gas giant, Jupiter, was the first to form in our young solar system.

Of incidental interest is that in 2012 a new planet was discovered in a solar system some 375 light years from the Earth.  HIP 11952b and HIP 11952c are two dual planets that have been established at around 12 billion years old.  There position, of course, exceeds the galactic limits of our solar system, but this dual planet system is older than Earth by about 8 billion years, our solar system being around 4.6 billion years old.  It is thought that these two planets came into existence about a billion years after the Big Bang.  If these extra-solar system planets have moons, then their moons could have been the earliest moons in our locale.

Were the sailors right to punish the ancient mariner? Who has the right to punish sinners in "The Rime of the Ancient Mariner"?

The ship has been drawn toward the South Pole. They are surrounded by ice. When the Albatross arrives, they treat it as a good omen. They feed the Albatross and the ice breaks, allowing them to continue on their way back north. 

The mariner kills the Albatross, seemingly for no reason. The sailors are upset because the Albatross seemed to be a good omen and they think the bird had brought them luck. After all, the ice breaks after they feed it and the wind picks up and sends the ship back to the north: 

And it would work'em woe: 

For all averr'd, I kill'd the bird

That made the breeze to blow. 

However, the fog and mist arrives and the sailors think it was right that the mariner killed the bird that brought the fog and mist. Then, the ship becomes stranded and the men are dying of thirst. Again, they put the guilt back on to the mariner, this time hanging the dead Albatross on the mariner's neck. 

It seems that they condemn the mariner for destroying their luck and/or killing an omen from God. It is not necessarily clear that they disapprove of the killing itself. In this case, they would be right to disapprove of, and perhaps even right to punish the mariner, but they do it for superstitious reasons. This calls into question the justification for their punishment of the mariner. 

The question of who has the right to punish sinners supposes that there are people in positions of righteousness who have the ethical and objective perspectives with which to make good judgments. The sailors punish the mariner for somewhat selfish reasons. They determine that their rotten luck is caused by the mariner's sin. In general, people often think of the phrase from the Bible, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." In other words, only those who have never sinned can punish or condemn others. This implies that no one has the right to punish another. Taking this notion with the fact that the sailors punish the mariner for selfish reasons, one could argue that their punishment is unjustified because of their reasoning. 

Had the sailors condemned the act of killing itself, their punishment would seem more just. The lesson of the poem is not the simple notion that it is bad to kill something. It has a more existential and ecological context. To be sure, it is wrong to kill for no reason. We are all part of the world, so when we damage the world, we inevitably damage ourselves. (This is the ecological, karma-themed, notion that we are all connected.) If the sailors did in fact punish the mariner for this more philosophical, ecological reason, his punishment seems more justified.

In the end, he is punished appropriately by "Life in Death." This is the punishment that actually serves a useful purpose. He must repeatedly tell his story and thus, he becomes a living lesson for others to learn. It is therefore a more logical punishment that hanging the bird on his neck. This addresses the general question about who has the right to punish others. If the punishment is appropriate in this way, the punisher would be justified. 

A punishment is more appropriate if it is done to improve the world in some way. Simple vengeance or revenge is a reactionary way to punish. This seems to be a lesson of this poem: that the punishment should serve to make things better. The mariner must become a living (in death) lesson, teaching others the hard lesson that he has learned. 

Why do you think Jerry wants to be with the boys so badly?

At its core, "Through the Tunnel" is a coming of age story.  Jerry and his mom are on vacation together, and like most teenage boys Jerry wants some freedom and independence from his mom.  At least that's how I felt as a teenage boy. Jerry loves his mom just as much as he ever did, but he feels that his mom's presence makes him appear less independent. It even makes him feel less independent. He sees the other boys going about their fun without any mothers around and Jerry wants some of that. He wants to prove to himself and to the other boys that he is no longer a boy. He sees himself as a young man, and he wants the other boys to see him that way too.  

They looked down gravely, frowning. He knew the frown. At moments of failure, when he clowned to claim his mother’s attention, it was with just this grave, embarrassed inspection that she rewarded him. Through his hot shame, feeling the pleading grin on his face like a scar that he could never remove, he looked up at the group of big brown boys on the rock
and shouted. . .

You can see from the quote that Jerry is sick of the patronizing "little kid" look that he normally gets. That's why he trains so hard to make the swim. The tunnel is a metaphorical gateway to becoming a member of the young man group that the other boys belong to. 

What are some inventions of the Sumerians that impact our life today?

While many people have images of the caveman chipping away at stone to fashion the world's first wheel, it was actually the Sumerians that invented the wheel. They utilized wheels on carted vehicles to transport agricultural goods. The Sumerians created many new technologies to help them improve farming.  Historians credit the Sumerians for presenting writing to the world. Farmers and government officials needed a way of keeping track of records, so they devised a system that evolved into written records. Obviously, writing has been pretty important in the history of the world, as it is today.

In his book about Mesopotamia, History Begins at Sumer, Samuel Noah Kramer attributes nearly forty "firsts" that the Sumerians invented. His list includes:

The First Schools, The First Case of `Apple Polishing’, The First Case of Juvenile Delinquency, The First `War of Nerves’, The First Bicameral Congress, The First Historian, The First Case of Tax Reduction, The First `Moses’, The First Legal Precedent, The First Pharmacopoeia, The First `Farmer’s Almanac’, The First Experiment in Shade-Tree Gardening, Man’s First Cosmogony and Cosmology, The First Moral Ideals, The First `Job’, The First Proverbs and Sayings, The First Animal Fables, The First Literary Debates, The First Biblical Parallels, The First `Noah’, The First Tale of Resurrection, The First `St. George’, The First Case of Literary Borrowing, Man’s First Heroic Age, The First Love Song, The First Library Catalogue, Man’s First Golden Age, The First `Sick’ Society, The First Liturgic Laments, The First Messiahs, The First Long-Distance Champion, The First Literary Imagery, The First Sex Symbolism, The First Mater Dolorosa, The First Lullaby, The First Literary Portrait, The First Elegies, Labor’s First Victory, The First Aquarium.

The Sumerians also developed the concept of time. They tracked days and months and years. They divided the minutes and the hours into increments of sixty, the same way it is done in the present day. The Sumerians also contributed the 360-degree circle, the concept of a number system, and irrigation management. It is obvious that the Sumerians had a great effect on history because of their innovations.