In Hatchet, what two true things come to Brian's mind after not being rescued by the plane?

At first, the plane flying over the lake without spotting him sent Brian into a depression. He had been unwilling to continue trying, unwilling to go on surviving and had begun wishing for it to simply end. He had let the fire go out, he simply sat and hoped for an end. He even went so far as to cut himself with the hatchet, hoping to end the process himself.

But once he realized that he had not killed himself, that he was still there, he also realized that he knew two true things about himself. 

The first was that he was new, he had changed. He was not the same Brian that had crashed and survived for some time. He would never actually be like that Brian again for he had permanently changed.

The second true thing he realized was that he would not die, he would simply "not let death in again" the way he had when the plane flew over and did not rescue him.

In The Outsiders, when does it say Ponyboy's parents die?

In The Outsiders, the reader learns that Ponyboy's parents have died in chapter 3 of the novel. This occurs right after Johnny, Two-Bit, and Ponyboy have a run in with a group of Socs while walking Cherry and Marcia to Two-Bit's house to pick up his car, and give them a ride home, after the movies. The run in almost leads to a fight between the two groups. Following this incident, Two-Bit leaves the two, while Johnny and Ponyboy go and lay in the lot to look at the stars, despite the cold weather. While laying there, Ponyboy falls asleep and has a dream about himself, and his family, moving out to the country. During this dream, Ponyboy talks about his brothers and parents. On page 48 of Chapter 3, while describing Darry, Ponyboy says "Darry would lose that cold, hard look and be like he used to be, eight months ago, before Mom and Dad were killed." Hope this helps!

Chlorine is usually found as a gas. If the temperature is -66, would chlorine still be a gas?

The answer to your question depends on the unit of temperature used. Temperature can be measured in degrees Celsius, degrees Fahrenheit, or Kelvin.

The freezing point of chlorine is -150.7 degrees Fahrenheit. This is equivalent to 171.65 K or -101.5 degrees Celsius.

The boiling point of chlorine is –29.27 degrees Fahrenheit. This is equivalent to 239.11 K or -34.04 degrees Celsius.

The phase of chlorine depends on the substance’s given temperature.

• In order to remain a gas, the actual temperature of chlorine needs to be at or above the boiling point.


• If the given temperature of chlorine is between its freezing and boiling point, then the substance will be a liquid.


• If the given temperature of chlorine is at or below the freezing point, then it will be a solid.

Thus, chlorine will be found in the following states at a temperature of -66 for each unit of temperature.

• Because -66 degrees Fahrenheit, is between chlorine’s freezing point of -150.7 degrees Fahrenheit and boiling point of –29.27 degrees Fahrenheit, chlorine will be a liquid at -66 degrees Fahrenheit.
  


• Because -66 K is less than chlorine’s freezing point of 171.65 K, chlorine would be a solid at -66 K.
  


• 
  Chlorine will be a liquid at -66 degrees Celsius. This is because -66 degrees Celsius is between chlorine’s freezing point of -101.5 degrees Celsius and boiling point of -34.04 degrees Celsius.

`2x + y + 3z = 1, 2x + 6y + 8z = 3, 6x + 8y + 18z = 5` Solve the system of linear equations and check any solutions algebraically.

EQ1:  `2x+y+3z=1`

EQ2:  `2x+6y+8z=3`

EQ3: `6x+8y+18z=5`

To solve this system of equation, let's apply elimination method. In elimination method, a variable/variables should be removed in order to come up with another equation.

In this system of equation, let's eliminate variable x using EQ1 and EQ2.

`2x + y + 3z=1`

`2x +6y + 8z=3`

To do so, multiply EQ2 by -1.

`-1 * (2x + 6y+8z)=3*(-1)`

`-2x - 6y-8z=-3`

And add this to EQ1.

           `2x + y + 3z = 1`

`+`     `-2x - 6y -8z=-3`

`-----------------`

               `-5y - 5z=-2 `        Let this be EQ4.

Eliminate x variable again to come up with another equation that has y and z only. Use EQ1 and EQ3.

`2x+y+3z=1`

`6x+8y+18z=5`

So multiply EQ1 by -3.

`-3(2x+y+3z)=1*(-3)`

`-6x-3y-9z=-3`

Then, add this to EQ3.

        `-6x - 3y-9z=-3`

`+`       `6x + 8y+18z=5`

`-----------------`

                    `5y + 9z = 2 `          Let this be EQ5.   

So the two new equations are:

EQ4:  `-5y-5z = -2`

EQ5:   `5y+ 9z = 2`

Since there two equations still contain more than two variables, let's eliminate another variable. Let's remove the y. To do so, add these two equations.

        `-5y - 5z =-2`

`+`       `5y +9z=2`

`------------`

                  `4z=0`

Then, solve for z.

`4z=0`

`z=0/4`

`z=0`

Then, plug-in this to either EQ4 or EQ5 to get the value of y.

`5y+9z=2`

`5y+9(0)=2`

`5y=2`

`y=2/5`

Now that the values of y and z are known, solve for x. To do so, plug-in these two values to either EQ1, EQ2 or EQ3.

`2x+y+3z=1`

`2x+2/5+3*0=1`

`2x+2/5=1`

`2x=1-2/5`

`2x=3/5`

`x=(3/5)/2`

`x=3/10`

Therefore, the solution is `(3/10, 2/5,0)` .

-6x-3y-9z=-3

Does anyone know the exact meaning of "Diffusion".

Diffusion is the movement of particles down their concentration gradient. In other words, diffusion occurs when particles move from an area of higher concentration to an area of lower concentration.

 Diffusion is a form of passive transport, which implies that it does not require the use of energy.

This movement is the result of the random kinetic motion of the particles within a substance. Kinetic energy is the energy of motion. All particles are in constant, random motion.

On the other hand, energy is required in the form of ATP (adenosine triphosphate) when particles move from areas of low centration to areas of high concentration. This form of transport is known as active transport. When occurring in a cell, active transport utilizes a protein carrier that is embedded within the cell membrane.

How many moles of oxygen must be used for the complete combustion of 203.383 moles of ethanol (C2H5OH)?

The first step to solving this problem is to write and balance the equation. When a hydrocarbon combusts completely with oxygen, the products are carbon dioxide and water:

`C_2H_5OH + 3 O_2 -gt 2 CO_2 + 3 H_2O`

The coeffcients used to balance a chemical equation represent the moles of the substances. Since oxygen has a coefficient of 3 and ethanol has a coefficient of 1, we know that three moles of O2 are required for every mole of ethanol that reacts, or we can say that the mole ratio of O2 to C2H5OH is 3:1. To find the number of moles of oxygen, multiply the given number of moles of ethanol by this mole ratio:

203.383 moles C2H5OH x (3 moles O2)/(1 mole C2H5OH) = 610.149 moles O2

Describe the distribution of earthquakes in the world.

Earth's crust is divided into a number of fragments, known as tectonic plates. These plates are in constant motion and it has been found that most of the earthquakes take place along the plate boundaries (regions where tectonic plates meet each other). Such earthquakes are known as interplate earthquakes. There are few instances of earthquakes within a given tectonic plate and such earthquakes are known as intraplate earthquakes. Some of the major earthquake-prone regions of the world include, margins of Pacific Ocean, boundary of Eurasian and Arabian plates, boundary of Indian and Australian plates, etc. One way to determine the intensity of the earthquake is by using Richter scale. On this scale, any two successive values are separated by a factor of 10. Thus, an earthquake of intensity 6 is 1000th time that of intensity 9 earthquake.

Hope this helps. 

WHATS NINE PLUS TEN?

We have a Math 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.

What is the tone of the poem "The Poison Tree" by William Blake?

That's a great question.

There is a layered or ambiguous tone to this poem.

The content of a work is, in some works, distinct from the tone. That isn't really the case here. The poem's content is marked by so many angry words--"wrath," "angry," "foe," etc. You can't help but hear part of the tone as, well, angry.

However, the tone itself is calmer, more distant, rational, and measured. The regularity of the rhyme, and the simplicity ("friend" and "end," "foe" and "grow," etc.) makes it more playful and singsong. The combination creates a tone of reflection, but also perhaps of denial and repression.

Take the narrator at his word: he hates this person, and considers him his enemy. If that's the case, then the ability to speak in so calm and measured a fashion means he is fundamentally divided, even hypocritical about his emotions.

In what ways does Rikki- Tikki exemplify the curiosity of a true mongoose in his first days in the bungalow?

The motto of the mongoose family is "Run and find out." Rikki demonstrates his faithfulness to that family creed during his first days in the bungalow. First he checks out the cotton wool to see if it is food; then he jumps on Teddy's shoulder and peeks down his shirt. On the first day, he occupies himself by "roaming over the house." He explores the bathroom, the writing table, and the man's cigar. He can't stay in bed with Teddy very long because he has to rush out and see what every little noise is. The next day, he explores the garden. Hearing crying, he curiously inquires, "What is the matter?"  and then asks, "Who is Nag?" When he meets Chuchundra during the night, he questions him, and then he eavesdrops on Nag and Nagaina. His curiosity pays off, for he hears them plotting to kill the man and learns about their eggs that will be hatching very soon. The next day, his curiosity as well as his intelligence spurs him to find Nagaina's eggs. The innate curiosity of his breed makes Rikki an effective protector of his human family. His agility and fighting skills would not have been much help if he hadn't overheard the two cobras plotting and if the 25 cobra eggs had been allowed to hatch. Staying true to his family motto made Rikki a formidable enemy for Nag and Nagaina.

What is the organizational pattern of the story "There Will Come Soft Rains"?

The organization of this story is chronological. It takes place in a 24 hour period from August 4, 2026 to August 5, 2026.   It starts at 7 A.M. with the computer getting everyone up for the day.  

"Tick-tock, seven o'clock, time to get up, time to get up, seven o'clock!" (pg 1)

The computer continues to cook breakfast, notify the family of any events that day, tell them what to wear to deal with the weather, and get the children off the school.  

At nine-fifteen, the computer mice clean the house. 

At ten o'clock the sun came out from behind a cloud, and you could see that this house was the only house that had been left standing after a nuclear event. 

At twelve noon, the dog returns with sores on his body and slowly dies.  By two-fifteen, the cleaning mice have disposed of his body. 

At two thirty-five the bridge tables were set up and at four o'clock they were put away.

And so the day progresses until a bough of a tree crashes into the house and starts a fire.   The time of day rules the story. The final lines end August 4th and start a new day.  

"Today is August 5, 2026, today is August 5, 2026, today is......" (pg 3)

The computer is repeating itself because the home has been destroyed and the computer is damaged.  

What makes the title, "Legal Alien," an oxymoron?

An oxymoron is a phrase or portmanteau which is composed of two words with differing, often opposing, meanings for the effect of novelty or complexity.

In this example, the words at odds with each other are "legal" and "alien." For something to be legal, it is acceptable or in compliance with the law. The term "legal" may also be used outside of its literal sense in reference to matters of the law. For something or someone to be "alien," there are implications of foreignness and potentially unwelcome or illicit. Together, the terms "legal" and "alien" conjure up ideas about the legalities of being alien. 

In her poetry, Pat Mora dwells on the complex issue of Mexican American identity. There is a common judgment in American culture that people of Hispanic or Latino descent, particularly those who are not fully assimilated into Anglo-American culture, are possibly illegal immigrants. The subject of the alien or unwelcome foreigner is a hot issue in American culture. Unfortunately, the complexity of this issue is often overlooked. The identities of Mexican Americans may be muddled up in hundreds of years of borders being moved and forced assimilation. What does it mean to Pat Mora to be a legal alien? To have been born on American soil with Mexican heritage and be misidentified as illegal? Or to have been born in Mexico and crossed into America and be granted citizenship? Or something else?

As you read through Pat Mora's work, consider the ways in which one may be a "legal alien."

`2x + 3y + 3z = 7, 4x + 18y + 15z = 44` Solve the system of linear equations and check any solutions algebraically.

You should notice that the system is indeterminate, since the number of variables is larger than the number of equations.

`2*(2x + 3y + 3z) = 14 => 4x + 6y + 6z = 14 => 4x = 14 - 6y - 6z`

Replace `14 - 6y - 6z ` for 4x in the second equation, such that:

`4x = 44 - 18y - 15z =>  14 - 6y - 6z = 44 - 18y - 15z `

`12y + 9z = 30 => 4y + 3z = 10 => 4y = 10 - 3z => y = 5/2 - (3/4)z`

Replace back  `5/2 - (3/4)z` for y in equation `4x = 14 - 6y - 6z` , such that:

`4x = 14 - 6( 5/2 - (3/4)z ) - 6z`

`4x = 14 - 15 + (9/2)z - 6z`

`4x = -1 - (3/2)z => x = -1/4 - (3/8)z`

Hence, evaluating the solutions to the system, yields `x = -1/4 - (3/8)z, y = 5/2 - (3/4)z, z = z.`

What is the genre of A Doll's House by Henrik Ibsen?

Henrik Ibsen's A Doll's House is classified as both a naturalistic problem play and a modern tragedy.

In the realm of theatre, naturalism is a movement which chooses to reject the outdated and over-romanticized precepts of the dramatic genre in favor of creating a realistic study of human behaviors in meaningful conflicts. In A Doll's House, this approach is taken in order to critique the expectations of marriage in the 1800's and to examine the role of self-discovery in the course of human life. It does so by dramatically depicting the home life of a family in the throes of personal and financial crisis. 

The play is, of course, referred to as a tragedy because of the classic "unhappy" ending; in this case, the dissolution of Nora and Torvald's marriage after Torvald refuses to accept Nora's desire to escape the social and gender confinements that have left her feeling like a plaything in the hands of her father and husband. 

What is the tone of The Cask of Amontillado? What words does the author use to create that tone?

"The Cask of Amontillado" has an incredibly sinister and creepy tone about it.  What's odd for me though is how that tone is delivered.  Montresor is the narrator of the story, and he is a chillingly effective narrator, because his narration is incredibly matter of fact.  He just doesn't spout off and have emotional outbursts.    

Right from the start of the story, the reader is alerted to the overall ominous tone, because Montresor tells his readers that he seeks revenge.  

THE thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could; but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge.

Revenge is not an emotionless word.  Had Montresor told his readers that he sought judgment, I could believe that he would confront his "friend" in respectable, adult-like manner.  Or I would even consider that Montresor might use the law.  But that is not what revenge connotes.  Revenge tells readers that Montresor has a dark and evil plan to punish Fortunato.  And not just punish, but he will be punished with impunity.

I must not only punish, but punish with impunity.

Every time I read that line, I picture in my head some Marvel Comics uber villain finishing his plan and giving a maniacal laugh.  

The ominous and creepy tone continues throughout Montresor's narration.  He tells his readers that he sets his plans into motion at dusk.  Not sunset.  Not evening.  Dusk.  Who says that?  Dusk is when the zombies climb out of graves and people make deals with the devil.  Dusk is an eerie word.  

Then Poe really ups the creepy factor by this paragraph:

I took from their sconces two flambeaux, and giving one to Fortunato, bowed him through several suites of rooms to the archway that led into the vaults. I passed down a long and winding staircase, requesting him to be cautious as he followed. We came at length to the foot of the descent, and stood together on the damp ground of the catacombs of the Montresors.

It's a good thing for Montresor that Fortunato is drunk, because he obviously doesn't pick up on the ominous situation.  He's being led down into a vault, which is where things are hidden and locked away.  It's also not just any staircase to a basement.  It's a long and winding staircase.  Then Poe uses the word "catacombs."  That's where dead people are.  Why on Earth is the wine down there?  Especially since Montresor stated that he had it and wanted Fortunato to try some.  If it were anybody else, the wine would have been brought up to the main level earlier in the evening. 

Then Poe drops words like "crypt" and "mason."  Crypt is creepy for the same reason catacomb is creepy.  Dead people are there.  As for Montresor being a mason, I've read enough history and conspiracy theories to know that all kinds of questionable deeds have been done by the masons.  It's at this point in the story when the reader's intuition starts screaming at Fortunato to get out of there quickly.  But of course he doesn't, and Montresor casually buries him alive.  It hasn't bothered him in fifty years either. 

How does Mathilde Loisel's motivation change during the course of the story "The Necklace".

Mathilde Loisel is the main character in Guy de Maupassant's short story "The Necklace." At the beginning of the story she is described as unhappy and bored with her middle class life. She longs for the material trappings of the upper class. She takes for granted her devoted husband and comfortable, if not lavish, lifestyle. After all, she even has a maid. These things are not enough for her, however, and she dreams of wealth, luxury and being around important people. De Maupassant writes,

She would dream of great reception halls hung with old silks, of fine furniture filled with priceless curios, and of small, stylish, scented sitting rooms just right for the four o’clock chat with intimate friends, with distinguished and sought-after men whose attention every woman envies and longs to attract. 

Even when her husband brings home an invitation to a fancy ball she is not satisfied until she has a new dress and expensive jewelry to wear. Her motivation is totally materialistic in the beginning. That is, until she loses the necklace she borrowed from her friend Madame Forestier.

Because of the loss, and the stifling social etiquette of the time which prevented her and her husband from telling Madame Forestier, they purchase, for a hefty price, a replacement. The expenditure throws the couple into poverty and that is when Mathilde's motivation changes. Instead of wallowing in sorrow she behaves quite admirably by helping her husband pay off the debt. She rises to the occasion:

Mme. Loisel experienced the horrible life the needy live. She played her part, however, with sudden heroism. That frightful debt had to be paid. She would pay it. She dismissed her maid; they rented a garret under the eaves. 

By changing significantly and altering her motivation she becomes a dynamic character that the reader might almost admire if we didn't feel very sorry for her as she learns, in a surprise twist, that the necklace was actually worth nothing.

Why is Ralph elected chief in Lord of the Flies?

I am working from the 1997 Penguin / Riverhead edition of the book.  Your edition of the book may have slightly different page numbers.

The election of Ralph as chief occurs in chapter 1 on pages 19-20.  At this point in the book, the boys are all gathered at the platform near the lagoon.  Ralph is holding the shell, having just blown it to attract all of the scattered boys to the platform.  Once the boys have introduced themselves by name, Jack says, "We've got to decide on being rescued." There is some talking, one boy says he wants to go home, and Ralph replies, "Shut up," and lifts the conch over his head.  He then says, "Seems to me we ought to have a chief to decide things."

Jack says he ought to be chief, and another kid, Roger says, "Let's have a vote." The paragraph that follows describes the voting and the reasons that Ralph was elected chief.  I've italicized the relevant sentences.

This toy of voting was almost as pleasing as the conch.  Jack started to protest, but the clamor changed from the general wish for a chief to an election by acclaim of Ralph himself.  None of the boys could have found good reason for this; what intelligence had been shown was traceable to Piggy while the most obvious leader was Jack.  But there was a stillness about Ralph as he sat that marked him out: there was his size, and attractive appearance, and most obscurely, yet most powerfully, there was the conch.  The being that had blown that, had sat waiting for them on the platform with the delicate thing balanced on his knees, was set apart.

What this paragraph shows is that even though Piggy was the most intelligent, and Jack the natural leader, Ralph was chosen because he had blown the conch (and was still holding it).  Ralph's "stillness" "size", and "attractive appearance" are factors as well, but not nearly as important as the conch. The other boys have associated Ralph with the power of the conch.

There is a political point that Golding is trying to make here, and that is that we often pick political leaders not based on their intelligence or their ability to lead, but rather on superficial things like attractiveness and appearance.

According to economists, almost everything we do has costs and benefits. Identify the costs and benefits of each of the following: going to the...

Going to the dentist has the benefit of continued dental health, associated with a higher quality of life and additionally with physical attractiveness. The costs of these services are the actual direct financial costs of paying the dentist as well as and pain and suffering associated with the work that is performed as well as the time which must be dedicated to actually being at the dental clinic.

Completing homework offers the benefit of education and good grades, both of which may be associated with a higher income as a working adult. One may also receive the benefit of self-satisfaction that comes from completing a necessary task. The cost of the action is the time required to complete it, as well as any ancillary costs associated with the work such as pencils, paper, and the cost of books and/or an internet connection.

Getting an extra hour of sleep may provide the benefit of being well-rested, but this depends on the amount of sleep one would have been getting otherwise. While getting enough sleep is associated with increased physical and mental health, it is possible to sleep too much resulting in grogginess and a decreased mental state. As such, the sleep itself may be either a benefit or a cost. Additionally, the hour itself has value so this action bears the cost of the loss of time that could have been used for other activities.

In Animal Farm, how is Benjamin affected by The Battle of the Windmill and why is he so influenced?

There is no reference in the text as to how Benjamin was affected by the battle. We can assume, however, that he was probably less affected on an emotional level than any of the other animals. He had not always been quite as forthcoming  and seemed to be quite unaffected by events, as the following quote illustrates:

Old Benjamin, the donkey, seemed quite unchanged since the Rebellion. He did his work in the same slow obstinate way as he had done it in Jones's time, never shirking and never volunteering for extra work either. About the Rebellion and its results he would express no opinion. When asked whether he was not happier now that Jones was gone, he would say only "Donkeys live a long time. None of you has ever seen a dead donkey," and the others had to be content with this cryptic answer. 

This type of reaction was common of him. He had made the following comment before the battle when Frederick and his men were gathered around the windmill:

"I thought so," he said. "Do you not see what they are doing? In another moment they are going to pack blasting powder into that hole."

This remark indicates Benjamin's astute observation of what the humans were up to. He realized that they were planning to blow up the product of their extremely difficult labour. None of the other animals could see this. It indicates that Benjamin possessed a superior intellect, but that he was not willing to get involved and was quite apathetic to the detriment of his suffering comrades. Perhaps he believed that if he should strive to change things for the better, it would come to nothing as it had with Snowball, and he therefore remained aloof.

After their victory in this battle, it was Boxer, surprisingly, who asked what victory they were celebrating when the gun was fired, since the windmill had been completely destroyed. Squealer had taken exception to his remark and commented that their victory lay in the fact that they had driven the humans off an area which they (the humans) had just recently occupied. Boxer, who was injured and bleeding, then offered this cynical but remarkably accurate response:

"Then we have won back what we had before."

To which Squealer responded:

"That is our victory."

After this, there was a celebration and the animals solemnly buried their dead. Each animal was rewarded for his or her role in the victory with an apple, whilst the birds received two ounces of corn and the dogs three biscuits each. A few days after the battle, the pigs got drunk from a case of whiskey they had discovered and later decided to use a paddock to sow barley, for obvious reasons. Late one night, Squealer was discovered lying next to a broken ladder with a paint brush and a pot of paint not far away, next to the wall on which the commandments were written. The animals did not understand what all this meant, 'except old Benjamin, who nodded his muzzle with a knowing air, and seemed to understand, but would say nothing.'

Once again, it is obvious that he knew what was to come, for the next morning another commandment had been altered:

They had thought the Fifth Commandment was "No animal shall drink alcohol," but there were two words that they had forgotten. Actually the Commandment read: "No animal shall drink alcohol TO EXCESS."

This then, was the sum of Benjamin's responses to the Battle of the Windmill and the pigs' devious and self-indulgent actions. 

Has the tomb of Jesus been found?

To find the tomb of Jesus would one of the greatest finds in the history of Biblical archaeology.  For that reason, the location is one of controversy.  There are no less than five sites that lay claim to the final resting place of Jesus Christ.  Adding to the controversy, the very mention of a burial site for Jesus is sacrilege in the Christian and Muslim communities.  Scriptures teach that Jesus ascended into heaven.

The five sites that claim to harbor the remains of Jesus range from believable locations in Jerusalem to more unlikely locations in Japan and Kashmir (India/Pakistan.)  In April of 2015, an Israeli geologist studied a tomb with the inscriptions of Jesus and his father Joseph and studied the soil around it.  He claimed that through chemical tests and the names on the tombs that the East Jerusalem site was the burial place of Jesus.  Archaeologists met his claims with great skepticism and feel it is unlikely to contain the remains of Jesus.  As of 2015, there is no agreement in the scientific community that the burial location of Jesus has been discovered.  

In A People's History of the United States, why did the mass emigration by blacks from the South occur in the 1920's rather than the Reconstruction...

"Lincoln got the praise for freeing us, but did he do it? He gave us freedom without giving us any chance to live to ourselves and we still had to depend on the southern white man for work, food, and clothing, and he held us out of necessity and want in a state of servitude but little better than slavery."  Ex-slave Thomas Hall, Federal Writer's Project

The limitations for freed slaves after the Civil War is documented in Chapter Nine:  Slavery Without Submission, Emancipation Without Freedom. Although the Civil War provided African-Americans with the hope of freedom, the reality of the situation was that they were still bound to the land like serfs. Zinn outlines the limited autonomy of the freedman that was the actuality and he blames it on black codes.  Black codes were passed in all of the former Confederate states.  They limited the movement of black people and tied them to their former positions on the plantations.  Black laws provided for complete separation of the races.  There were black codes that actually stated freedmen could be placed in "forced apprenticeship" programs under certain circumstances.  Forced apprenticeship was tantamount to the chattel slavery that existed before the war.  Even if the freeman had the resources, education, and means for moving to the North, black codes made it legally impossible for them. Zinn also briefly mentions at the beginning of the paragraph that racist attitudes were also prevalent in the northern states, which would suggest that migrating north was not a viable option.

Young Goodman Brown begins “doubting whether there really was a heaven above him.” Why? What events cause him to begin to doubt?

Like many elements of Hawthorne's classic short story, there are two meanings to this line.

The first is because Goodman is doubting himself. What he has heard (the holy men talking) makes no sense, and he is now wondering if he is dreaming.

The second is spiritual. His despair is growing so intensely that he feels like there is no heaven--that the world is completely dark, abandoned by God, or at least, lost to sin and Satan. This second view is underscored by what happens soon after: a cloud passes overhead, and blocks out the clouds. If there is a heaven, he can't see it anymore.

The reason he doubts himself and feels like the world has gone dark or been lost are the same. He has seen people he thought were good, people from his community who he has known his whole life. However, instead of being good, they have become evil: they literally worship the devil.

What is the narrator suffering from in The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-time Indian?

In The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-time Indian, Junior, the narrator and protagonist of the novel, suffers physically from hydrocephalus, or water on the brain.  In the first chapter of the novel, Junior details his birth and the struggle that he has had with his physical condition.  Junior also suffers from other physical ailments such as seizures.  Aside from his physical afflictions, Junior also suffers from discrimination.  For example, when he leaves the reservation school in Wellpinit to attend school in an all-white farming town Reardan, many Indians feel that he is being a traitor, and they are not quiet about it when they see Junior.  They taunt and ridicule him publicly.  Similarly, the students at Reardan discriminate against Junior when he transfers into the school, and they call him derogatory names such as "chief."  So these are some of the things from which Junior suffers in the novel.

What are some examples of transfer techniques propaganda in Animal Farm?

We should start with definitions. The idea behind transfer in propaganda or even advertising is the idea of projecting either positive or negative qualities of a person to another in order to make the second more acceptable or less acceptable. 

We see this technique used many times in Animal Farm. When the Windmill is destroyed, the blame is shifted to Snowball. According to Napoleon, he has been a traitor all along.  He conspired with humans to bring havoc on Animal Farm. Here is what Napoleon says:

"Do you know the enemy who has come in the night and overthrown our windmill? SNOWBALL! ...in malignity, thinking to set back our plans and avenge himself for his ignominious expulsion, this traitor has himself crept her under cover of night and destroyed our work of nearly a year...."

The greater subtly is this. The windmill is actually a good idea, but the problem is that Snowball thought of it. So, what Napoleon does is discredit Snowball and simultaneously take credit for the Windmill. So, the building of the windmill is now transferred to Napoleon. He become synonymous with it. 

What is Russian Formalism, and what was its effect on literature?

Russian Formalism was a literary movement and primarily a school of literary criticism/theory which developed in Russia in the early 20th century. Although the practitioners of this method had diverse ways of approaching formalism, the general idea is that these critics focused on poetic techniques, language, and the structure of literature. This was an attempt at making the study of literature more scientific. They focused on the texts themselves, giving less attention to authorial intent, biographical information, and cultural/historical significance. One of the goals was to distinguish literary language from all other language. What makes poetry poetic? 

Viktor Shklovsky was one of the more influential Russian Formalists. He endeavored to study literature for its structural functions and what makes it different from other language formations. He wanted to get away from critiquing and analyzing literature in terms of social, political, emotional, and psychological meanings and manifestations. He coined the term "defamiliarization" to denote the way that literary and poetic language differs from ordinary language. Literary language is unfamiliar. It causes the reader to slow down the reading process. The technique is artful because it makes the familiar unfamiliar.

Formalists also studied the novel in structural terms. They analyzed the connection between story (chronology of events) and plot (the raw material of the story). In Russian, story is "fabula" and the plot is called "sjuzhet." The Russian Formalists were different from but are often compared to the New Critics in America. Both groups shared some similar formalist methods.

The formalist method widely influenced literary theory from the early 1900s onward. Given the focus on literary structure, the Formalists had a large influence on subsequent Structuralist theorists. And in turn, they would have an indirect influence on Post-structuralist theorists. Although Feminist, Marxist, Post-colonial, Gender, and Postmodern theorists focus more on political and social issues in literature, the notion of distinguishing the uniqueness of literary language is still a part of many modern traditions.

Find examples of exposition in the story. Then based on what you learn, write a sentence that provides some background information about the...

Exposition is a literary device that provides background information in a piece of writing. In this instance, you are looking for background information on three characters in Flannery O’Conner’s “A Good Man is Hard to Find.”

In this short story, the first paragraph provides background information about the Grandmother, Bailey, and The Misfit. The grandmother is unhappy about traveling with her son’s family because they are going to Florida. She would prefer to visit relatives in east Tennessee. As she complains about the trip her son, Bailey, reads the paper and ignores her. She speaks about the escaped convict known as The Misfit. She is afraid the family will run into him if they travel to Florida.

Using information from the exposition, you can write sentences about the characters.

Grandmother is a woman who states her negative opinions about the family’s travel plans before they leave on a trip to Florida.

Bailey, Grandmother’s adult son, ignores his mother’s complaints as he continues to read the paper knowing that he will not change his plans.

The Misfit is an escaped convict from the federal penitentiary who is believed to be traveling to Florida.

What is the disadvantage of privatization in Tanzania?

Privatization is a process, set of policies, project, or ideology where ownership, management, and/or provisioning of resources, goods, or services are transferred from the state (the public sphere) or communities to domestic or foreign individuals or companies (the private sphere).

In Tanzania, along with many countries in the Developing World, privatization occurred in the late 1980s, in exchange for development loans. The terms for this exchange, or conditional loan, were set by the World Bank and International Monetary Fund, and are widely known as "structural adjustment."  

Two examples of the negative impact this had on Tanzania can be seen in terms of health care and labor relations. In terms of health care, the policy to shift public control over health facilities, led to fewer clinics in the areas where the need was the greatest. This, in turn, affected access to health by creating more unequal and inequitable coverage. In the case of agriculture and sugar plantations, parastatal investments where sold off to private and mostly foreign owners who eliminated costs by cutting back on labor, creating a surge in unemployment and new informal economies (including sex markets). 

How can the meeting between Daisy and Gatsby be paraphrased?

When Daisy and Gatsby are reunited in Chapter IV, it is very awkward as they both try to grapple with their feelings, all the while pretending to be very matter-of-fact, at least at first.

Daisy is the first to speak, saying that she is very happy to see Gatsby again. Gatsby turns to Nick, telling him that he and Daisy had met before (although Nick already knows this). When Gatsby almost breaks Nick's clock, he apologizes, and Nick assures him that the clock is old-fashioned anyway. Daisy mentions that it's been quite a long time since she and Gatsby have seen one another, and Gatsby automatically replies that, in just a few months, it will have been five years. They are all relieved when the tea is ready because it gives them something to do besides stare awkwardly at one another and try to think of things to say. Finally, Nick gets up to leave and Gatsby follows Nick out of the room as if he's afraid to be alone with Daisy, and he only goes back in when Nick accuses him of being rude by leaving her alone.

`x - 2y + 5z = 2, 4x - z = 0` Solve the system of linear equations and check any solutions algebraically.

Since the number of equations is smaller than the numbers of variables, the system is indeterminate.

You may write the first equation, such that:

`x + 5z = 2 + 2y`

You need to use a greek letter for y, such that:

`y = alpha`

`x + 5z = 2 + 2alpha => x = 2 + 2alpha - 5z`

You may replace `2 + 2alpha - 5z` in the equation x = z, such that:

`z = 2 + 2alpha - 5z => 6z = 2 + 2alpha`

`z = 1/3 + (alpha)/3`

Hence, evaluating the solutions to the system, yields `x =  1/3 + (alpha)/3, y = alpha, z =  1/3 + (alpha)/3.`

When is Scout honest?

Scout is a very direct and honest character all throughout Harper Lee's To Kill a Mockingbird. But, due to her youth, she does not always handle her direct honesty with social decorum, which gets her into trouble because her directness has a tendency to make those around her angry. Since Scout is such a direct and honest character, she serves as an excellent narrator to voice the author's tone. Through Scout, Lee gives us an honest look at some social injustices and tells us that not all of society's problems should be handled with social decorum; instead, some should be handled with direct honesty.

While examples of Scout's honesty can be found all throughout the book, one fascinating moment of honesty can be seen soon after the trial. After the trial, Scout begins the third grade. One day her third-grade class enters into a discussion about Hitler's treatment of the Jews. During the discussion, Scout's third-grade teacher, Miss Gates, speaks out against Hitler's treatment of the Jews by pointing out that one goal of democracies is to prevent people from persecution:

That's the difference between America and Germany. We are a democracy and Germany is a dictatorship. ... Over here we don't believe in persecuting anybody. Persecution comes from people who are prejudiced. (Ch. 26)

However, Miss Gates's reflections on democracies surprises Scout, even angers her, because she distinctly remembers hearing Miss Gates make a very prejudiced comment to Miss Stephanie Crawford while exiting the courthouse after Tom Robinson's trial. Scout is so disturbed by her teacher's display of hypocrisy that she feels the need to have an honest conversation with someone older and wiser about the unfairness of Miss Gates's attitude, so she goes to Jem and explains what she had observed immediately after the trial:

I heard her say it's time somebody taught 'em a lesson, they were gettin' way above themselves, an' the next thing they think they can do is marry us. Jem, how can you hate Hitler so bad an' then turn around and be ugly about folks right at home—. (Ch. 26)

Scout's purpose was to honestly and openly reflect on things that are disturbing her, yet Jem's reaction is very surprising: he is furious to the point of being physically violent with her. Since Scout is still very young, what she fails to realize is that Jem is still too upset by the unfairness he observed on the day of the trial to be able to talk about his feelings. Had Scout realized this, social decorum would have instinctively told her not to talk to Jem about her concerns but to talk to her father instead. Hence, this serves as one example in which Scout's direct honesty sadly makes people around her angry.

Yet, author Lee uses this scene to show that such social injustices need to be addressed with direct honesty, regardless of people's protestations. Therefore, Scout as a direct and honest narrator serves to voice Lee's tone throughout the book while Lee directly and honestly exposes and criticizes social injustices.

What are some common modernist themes found in both T.S. Eliot's "The Waste Land" and the TV show Mad Men?

There are a number of modern themes in both of these that give them commonality, despite the difference in time period for their settings. The themes of alienation, fear, ennui and decay are said to be post-war themes explored by Eliot in The Waste Land which occurs in the wake of the first world war. Mad Men, on the other hand, begins in 1960, just after the Korean War and well after the end of World War Two. But the same themes apply. The fact that The Waste Land is about European culture and Mad Men is about America culture does not seem to matter significantly in this comparison. The phrase "Hurry Up Please It's Time!" is an English idiom referring to closing time in a pub, what we'd call "the last round" in America. The repetitive use of this phrase in the second section of the poem, "A Game of Chess," speaks to the themes of ennui and decay, the tendency for men of the war generation to drown their sorrows in alcohol, a theme very much present in Mad Men as well, as we see characters like Freddy Rumsen and Donald Draper affected significantly by their overuse of alcohol. In England pub culture is also to some extent about male bonding, whereas in America it is more likely to be associated with the seduction of women (a common theme in Don Draper's life).

How do the characters Davies from The Caretaker, Stanley from The Birthday Party, and Max from The Homecoming all by Harold Pinter avoid or try to...

To understand Harold Pinter's plays, we must first understand the 'theater of the absurd.' This is because Pinter is one of the few playwrights connected to this absurdist movement in theater.

The word 'absurd' as defined by this movement, takes its context from the idea that life is largely meaningless. The absurdist movement questions why we live and why we die, but provides no answers for such a state of affairs. With the advent of the two world wars, absurdist philosophers further highlighted the hopelessness of life under the absurdity of Soviet-style Marxist rule.

On the one hand, proponents of Marxism heralded its doctrines as the potential answer to mankind's every problem; on the other hand, the tenets of Marxism brought about untold suffering and degradation to millions. None who lived under the system dared to question the validity of such an ideology. All were expected to acknowledge (even at the expense of their own sanity), the benefits of such a system. Any who dared to veer from this path were touted as subversives and traitors. Hence, the absurdity of the situation.

Many found, even as they suffered under totalitarian regimes, that their religious faith fell far short in according them the answers they desperately needed.

Theater of the absurd conventions.

Harold Pinter and the theater of the absurd.

Hence, absurdist theater is all about presenting snapshots of certain situations in an individual character's life. Absurdist plays do not debate morality or philosophies; the authorial voice is not lent to designing the kind of neat plot-lines theater goers have come to expect from traditional theater. No, the purpose of an absurdist play is to paint an unvarnished truth of the bewilderment and confusion human beings endure when their lives are deprived of the certainties which previously characterized their existence. So, when an individual is deprived of the comforts of a rational existence, what becomes of his ability to express himself and to extricate himself from such an irrational state of affairs?

It is no wonder that all three of the plays you mention are characterized by a disturbing lack of cohesion in terms of language and structure. We are disturbed that we can't make heads or tails out of Davies, Max, and Stanley's lives; however, Pinter is subtly trying to tell us that neither of these three men can either. The famous Pinter pregnant pause or silence is clearly utilized to symbolize utter detachment, confusion, and the volatility inherent in numerous conversations.

Language of silence in the plays of Harold Pinter.

In The Homecoming, Max is a cantankerous, old man. He hides his fear of irrelevance through an outwardly intimidating demeanor; his bravado and loud recriminations causes him to have a contentious relationship with his sons (Lenny, Joey, and Teddy). His rapport (if it can be called that) with his sons is characteristically dysfunctional. Max is as apt to be physically abusive as he is to be physically affectionate. After Max punches Joey in the stomach (because Joey apologized for Max's crude characterization of Ruth as a 'smelly scruffer' and a 'stinking pox-ridden slut.'), he is openly affectionate with Teddy.

Pinter portrays Max as a man who is afraid, both for the loss of his virility and for his fast eroding sexual relevance to any woman. He struggles to maintain his dominance in a household of men through intimidation and callous manipulation of everyone's emotions. The play ends with Max, crawling towards Ruth, begging for some semblance of feminine affection from the calculating woman.

In The Birthday Party, Stanley Webber must protect himself from some unknown, nebulous past. He lodges with Petey and Meg Boles in a seaside town. Stanley allows himself to indulge in a flirtation of sorts with his married landlady whenever Petey is not at home. However, we get the idea that he is also somewhat repulsed by Meg's sexually suggestive bantering and that he only participates to insulate himself from an honest assessment of his own precarious situation in life. Pinter never really tells us what Stanley fears, but both McCann and Goldberg soon introduce a sinister element into the story.

As the play continues, it becomes apparent to us that Stanley is afraid of the two men. He tries to get them to leave through equivocation and subterfuge, but is unsuccessful. In the end, both men's bizarre and disturbing interrogation techniques drive Stanley to mental oblivion; because of their verbal onslaught, Stanley suffers a nervous breakdown, his speech becomes characterized by unintelligible grunting, and he becomes a shadow of himself.

As with our initial meeting of Stanley, this is a man who evades trouble through denial and mental detachment. He is also emotionally weak and impressionable and is reduced to the level of an imbecile as a result of McCann's and Goldberg's machinations. He is no match, physically or mentally for both men, and one can only guess what his coming fate is at the hands of Monty's 'special treatment.'

List five details that let the reader assume Mr. Calloway and his band members were very successful.

The reader is led to believe that the band is successful because of many elements the author weaves into the plot. Right from the beginning of the story, the flyer Bud carries around is described in detail. It contains words that would lead someone to think the band was a success. The flyer indicated that the band was coming from a limited standing room only (SRO) engagement in New York City. They were referred to as masters of jazz on the flyer.

When Bud finally finds Mr. Calloway, he finds that he has a luxurious car. He also has a band of several members and they appear to be practicing and setting up on a stage at a venue.

The band members all travel together to a restaurant to eat. The meal is large and they all appear to eat well. The lead singer of the band is described as being well dressed and having a good deal of jewelry.

In talking with Bud, the band members explain that in the future they have many long car rides all over Michigan to performances that are booked. They obviously are in demand.

Can you help me with the perspectives of people concerning the effect on trust in government.

Trust in government has become a fairly significant issue over the past 40-50 years. Prior to the Vietnam War, people generally had trust in the government. They believed the government was working on their behalf. They also believed the government was telling them the truth, or at least as much as the government could share, about events that were occurring. This trust took a major hit in the 1960s.

In the 1960s, a credibility gap developed that still exists today. The government was sharing information about the Vietnam War that didn’t match with the news reports and the television images of what was going on in the war. People were convinced the government wasn’t being honest with them. This feeling was somewhat proven by the Pentagon Papers. The expansion of the war into Cambodia also didn’t help with this perception.

In the 1970s, trust took another big hit. President Nixon insisted he had nothing to do with the Watergate Scandal. However, as more information became available, it became clear President Nixon had some role in the cover-up of the scandal. He had to resign his office becoming the only President to do so.

Today, many people believe special interests and people with lots of money run and influence the government. It seems the political parties can’t or won’t agree on anything. It appears little is getting done by the gridlock that seems to exist on the national level.

While there are people who continue to trust our government and who believe that our government works for them and has their best interests at heart, more and more people are voicing their dissatisfaction with the government according to national polls. This dissatisfaction and lack of trust seem to be growing each and every day.

What are the 4 variables affects the strength of an electromagnet?

Four factors that affect the strength of an electromagnet are:

1. The type of material that makes up the core of the electromagnet. This core is called the solenoid. Common materials that make up the core are iron, aluminum, copper, and steel.

2. The size of the solenoid affects the strength of an electromagnet. The larger the core, the stronger the electromagnet.

3. A metal wire is twisted around the solenoid. The number of times the wire is twisted around the solenoid affects the strength of the electromagnet. The more twists of the wire, the stronger the electromagnet.

4. The strength of the current that passes through the solenoid also affects the strength of an electromagnet. The greater the current, the stronger the electromagnet.

What creates the dark splotches on the sun's face?

The dark splotches on the sun are called sunspots. Sunspots are found within the photosphere of the sun. The photosphere is the surface of the sun and the part of the sun that is seen by humans on Earth. Sunspots appear darker than the surrounding areas because they have lower temperatures than the surrounding areas. Sunspots have a temperature of approximately 4500 K. This is nearly 1500 K cooler than the surrounding areas of the photosphere.

Sunspots are also associated with magnetic fields. Sunspots move across the photosphere in a vortex-like pattern, similar to the way a tornado moves on Earth. As they move, the size of the sunspots may increase or decrease. Such movement is sometimes referred to as magnetic storms.

Three consecutive asides (lines 132-137) occur between Malcolm and Donalbain. What are the rest of the characters doing on stage during these...

The conversation between Malcolm and Donalbain that occurs at the end of Act 2, Scene 3, actually does not consist of asides. An aside is a dramatic convention whereby a character, who is on stage with other characters, speaks either to himself, another character, or even the audience, without being heard by any character who is not supposed to hear. It is usually an opportunity for the audience to hear what a character is truly thinking, as we do not have access to their unspoken thoughts as we might in a novel or short story.

When Malcolm and Donalbain discuss their plans with one another, now that their father has been murdered, they are alone on stage with each other. Just before their private conversation, everyone on stage says the line, “Well contented” (2.3.159), and then there is a line of stage direction indicating that “All but Malcolm and Donalbain exit.” Therefore, there are no other characters on stage while they are speaking. If there had been, it is likely that those characters would carry on with conversations of their own so that they wouldn't notice the private interaction happening without them.

Why did Tybalt kill Mercutio in the play Romeo and Juliet?

The answer to this question can be found in Act III, Scene 1 of Romeo and Juliet. Tybalt, a Capulet, was not looking for a fight with Mercutio, who is Romeo's friend and not a Montague. Tybalt is searching for Romeo when he encounters Mercutio and Benvolio. When Romeo arrives, Tybalt says "peace be with you" to Mercutio, who has repeatedly tried to goad him into a duel by insulting and challenging him. When Romeo refuses to fight Tybalt, Mercutio steps in and offers a direct challenge that Tybalt cannot refuse with honor. He seems to be holding his own with Tybalt (who he has previously characterized as a master duelist) until Romeo steps in and attempts to restrain him. When he does this, Tybalt runs Mercutio through, giving him a mortal wound. This is a pivotal event because Romeo responds by fighting with Tybalt when he returns. He kills Tybalt, and is banished as a result. This begins the chain of events that lead to his and Juliet's tragic end.

How does Shelley present ideas about power in "Ozymandias"?

Percy Bysshe Shelley presents several ideas about power in his poem 'Ozymandias', the primary one being that power (no matter how strong) is fleeting. Shelley does this largely through the imagery used in the poem; as the poem progresses, the images become more and more focused on the depiction of a once-powerful and intimidating ruler now crumbled in a desert wasteland.

Shelley presents this idea of the loss of power even before the poem's speaker makes it clear that he is describing a former ruler:

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

This image of two stone legs standing without a body already brings in the notion of what was once whole now being destroyed. It is also an immediate image of powerlessness because legs have no power without a body; the body is the source of power.

The description of the statue and its inscription bring in a more focused image of the loss of power:

"Near them, on the sand,/Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,/And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command/Tell that its sculptor well those passions read/Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things..."

The fallen body of the statue - the source of power - is described as "half sunk" and "shattered". Not only has the body been dismembered, but it is being further broken down; it is a complete destruction of what was once whole. The description of the statue's face shows shows coldness and cruelty - the primary characteristics embodied by this ruler. And while these characteristics "survive", they survive because they are "stamped on lifeless things"; this is really not survival at all.

"And on the pedestal, these words appear:/My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;/Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

This inscription finally reveals that the statue is one of a ruler and a great one at that. He is compared to God: he is the "King of Kings", which is a description usually attributed to God. He even seems to address God by using the phrase "ye Mighty". The capitalization of "Mighty" echoes the use of "Almighty" when referring to God. Ozymandias even goes so far as to command "ye Mighty" - likely God and other mighty rulers - to "look on [his] Works...and despair!" He believes his power to be so absolute as to be a match to the power of God.

The juxtaposition of this absolute power with the depiction of the desert landscape at the end of the poem fully realizes Shelley's idea about the impermanence of power:

"Nothing beside remains. Round the decay/Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare/The lone and level sands stretch far away."

For all of the power this ruler had, nothing remains aside from these words on a lifeless piece of stone and the "boundless and bare" sand. The desert landscape underscores the impermanence of power - and life itself - as it alludes to the Bible passage found in Genesis:

"For you are dust, and to dust you shall return."

This depiction of the impermanence and fleeting nature of power and rulers themselves is likely related to Shelley's own thoughts and experiences during the French Revolution. As David Mikics points out, the image of these ancient ruins actually made its way to Europe after Napoleon's conquest of Egypt in 1798. It is not difficult to see the connection Shelley was attempting to make between the image of this fallen ruler and the trajectory of the life and career of Napoleon and other French rulers. 

What significance does the title Of Mice and Men have?

The title of Of Mice and Men is taken from a poem written by the Scottish poet, Robert Burns, in 1785, called "To A Mouse." The following lines of this poem are highly significant in illuminating the novel's key themes (a translation is provided in brackets):

The best laid schemes o' Mice an' Men, [The best laid plans of mice and men],

Gang aft agley, [Often go wrong],

An' lea'e us nought but grief an' pain, [And leave us nothing but joy and pain],

For promis'd joy! [For promised joy!]

Like Burn's mouse, George and Lennie have a dream for their future: to own their own piece of land and run their own farm, as George comments in Chapter One:

Someday—we're gonna get the jack together and we're gonna have a little house and a couple of acres an' a cow and some pigs. 

But once the men find work on Tyler Ranch, their dream begins to unravel, just like the plans of the mouse in Burns' poem. Their conflicts with Curley and the (accidental) death of Curley's wife have a dramatic and enduring impact on the two men and the course of their lives. 

In this understanding, then, Steinbeck has deliberately taken the title from this quote because it symbolizes the destruction of the American Dream and sends the important message that, sometimes, things go wrong and there is nothing you can do to stop that from happening. 

What choice did the doctor force Sophie to make?

The answer to this question is far more complicated than it seems. The choice that the doctor forces Sophie to make is between her son and daughter; he forces her to choose which child lives and which one will be executed. This is a heart-wrenching and seemingly impossible choice for a loving parent to make. Sophie is forced into making this choice, though, because if she refuses to choose one child over the other, the doctor will kill them both. While it is heavily implied that he would enact that threat, it is possible he may not have. Since Sophie does choose, she will never know what would have happened if she had done otherwise. 

The repercussions of that particular choice influence each of Sophie's subsequent decisions. Since much of the novel is told through flashbacks, we can see how each choice she makes is influenced by her decision and the overwhelming amount of guilt that she feels because of it. By revealing the actual "choice" that Sophie makes so late in the novel, Styron provides an explanation for much of Sophie's character: her relationship with the abusive Nathan, confession of her past to Stingo, and finally another important decision Sophie makes towards the novel's end. 

The novel's title, then, can refer to the many choices that Sophie makes, and this emphasis on choice leaves a lasting impression about the nature of decision. The novel reveals that each choice we make can ultimately impact both our lives and the lives of others, yet the decisions with the greatest impact are often made suddenly, without any thought towards consequence. 

In Chapter 15, what was Atticus' motivation for being at the jail that evening?

Atticus leaves his home to sit outside Tom Robinson's jail cell the night before the trial as a precaution. He is motivated to keep Tom safe, so that Tom will have a chance to tell the "truth" during the trial. Earlier in Chapter 15, Sheriff Tate and other community members stop by Atticus' house to discuss a change of venue for the Tom Robinson case. Mr. Link Deas tells Atticus that he's worried about the Old Sarum bunch, but Atticus dismisses this notion. Atticus mentions that tomorrow is Sunday, and the Old Sarum bunch never drinks on Sundays. Therefore, Sheriff Tate has little to worry about. One of the community members says, "This is a special occasion, though..." (Lee 194) On Sunday night, Atticus leaves his house carrying a long extension cord with a light bulb at the end. Atticus plans on looking out for Tom Robinson's welfare, just in case the Old Sarum bunch tries to harm him. Eventually, the Old Sarum bunch arrives and confronts Atticus, who is sitting in a chair, reading the newspaper with the light above him. His decision to sit outside the jailhouse could have prevented Tom Robinson from getting lynched.

In the novel The Giver we can see Jonas's character grow and develop as he must make difficult choices that go against what he has traditionally...

As we grow older we develop our own moral code based on our experiences.

Jonas has to learn how to think for himself.  This is something that we all go through.  During the book, Jonas goes from blindly accepting everything he has been told to questioning everything he has ever believed.  Although his is an extreme example, the process of growing up still involves shedding delusions in his world and in ours.

Let’s take as an example the release of newchildren. At the beginning of the story, Jonas barely thinks twice about it.

Release of newchildren was always sad, because they hadn't had a chance to enjoy life within the community yet. And they hadn't done anything wrong. (Ch. 1)

Jonas is aware that there is something not good about releasing a baby, but he is not really paying attention.  Release is common in the community, but no one talks about what it really means and most people do not know.

Jonas learns the hard way what release means.  As he receives the memories throughout his training, he starts to feel and have human emotions.  Most people in his community do not feel anything, or at least not anything serious.  This allows him to have a reaction, a strong reaction, to watching his father kill the baby.

When Jonas sees his father’s release of the newborn twin, he suddenly realizes that release is wrong.  He is horrified to see his father murder the baby, and he starts to understand the undying devotion to rules and order has had a hazardous effect on his community.

"I said it because it's true. It's the way they live. It's the life that was created for them. It's the same life that you would have, if you had not been chosen as my successor."

"But he lied to me!" Jonas wept. (Ch. 20)

Jonas is upset because he has finally developed his own moral code.  It contradicts the one he has been taught all of his life.  His people value sameness and obedience, but Jonas learns that blind obedience can be immoral.

As we grow up, we have to assess what we have been taught and told and decide for ourselves if we believe it.  This is part of coming of age, or becoming an adult.  Like Jonas, you may have had to re-evaluate some of your deeply held beliefs as you got older.  Sometimes they are perfectly acceptable.  Other times, you may feel betrayed into believing something that is wrong.

What is the importance of the setting in Of Mice and Men?

The different settings serve as the backdrop to amplify the characterizations in Of Mice and Men.

The setting of the the Salinas River bank that opens and closes the novella is extremely important.  This is where we learn of the dreams that George and Lennie share.  It is also where we understand the power of hope that drives both men.  In the second and third chapters, the setting of the bunkhouse is where we learn more of the lives of the migrant workers who toil on the ranch. This setting helps us gain more insight into the people who move from place to place in order to find work in the 1930s.  We learn about how Candy lost his arm and the pain he experiences in losing his dog, as well as small characters's lives like Bill Tenner who used to work a cultivator and then moved on from the ranch. 

The setting is also important when the action shifts to Crooks's quarters.  The pain of segregation is explored when Lennie enters Crooks's room.  At this instant, the setting shows how racial discrimination enhanced the economic hardship of the 1930s.  Finally, the setting of the barn is essential to Of Mice and Men.  It is here where Curley's wife dies, and where George and Lennie eventually learn that their dreams for the future lie in ruins.  In these examples, Steinbeck uses different settings to amplify the characters' experiences.

What do these objects suggest to you? Why is the black box described as "battered"? Are there any other symbols in the story?

Your question hints that there are other objects in question, but only the black box is listed.  I will attempt to name another symbolic object in addition to the black box.  

The black box is obviously symbolic of the lottery itself and of the death that it brings.  The fact that it is described as "battered" tells the reader that the lottery has been happening for a very long time in that village.  The stoning of the lottery winner is a very old tradition.  

A second symbol in the story is the stones.  When the story begins, the narrator mentions that the children are busy collecting stones.  

Bobby Martin had already stuffed his pockets full of stones, and the other boys soon followed his example, selecting the smoothest and roundest stones; Bobby and Harry Jones and Dickie Delacroix-- the villagers pronounced this name "Dellacroy"--eventually made a great pile of stones in one corner of the square and guarded it against the raids of the other boys.

It seems completely innocuous at the time, but by the end of the story, the reader realizes the importance of the stones.  The box symbolizes death in one way.  It is the "decider" of who dies.  The stones symbolize death in another way.  They are the actual instruments of death.  And as long as people are willing to cast their stones, they are essentially showing that they are casting their votes in favor of the lottery system.   

What fifteen words are essential to understand the book Whirligig by Paul Fleischman?

Three key words to consider for the whole story are whirligig, penance, and atonement. A whirligig is a wooden toy that has arms that whirl or move whenever the wind blows. Brent has to make four whirligigs as memorials to Lea Zamora. A penance is a voluntary act that shows remorse for a wrongdoing. It is Brent’s penance to travel around the country and make and install the whirligigs. Atonement is the satisfaction of making amends for the wrongdoing. Brent is atoning for causing the accident that claimed Lea’s life.

Other random words that may be unfamiliar to general readers appear throughout the book.

Vuarnet sunglasses (Chapter 1, Party Time): Expensive and trendy sunglasses that Brent puts into his pocket and takes to the party as a status symbol.

Pawn (Chapter 1, Party Time): The chess piece with the lowest value. Can also mean a person who is being used by someone else. Brent could be considered one by Chaz, the party host, and even by Jonathan, the friend who goes to the party with him.

Ouija (Chapter 2, Weeksboro, Maine): A board used in séances to contact the spirit world. The act of “ouija walking” shows that Alexandra is into making spiritual or ethereal connections.

Guided imagery (Chapter 2, Weeksboro, Maine): Using words and/or music to imagine positive scenes with beneficial outcomes. Another illustration of Alexandra’s interest in spirituality.

Probation (Chapter 3, The Afterlife): The suspension of a sentence of someone convicted but not yet put into prison, with the conditions of continued good behavior and regular reporting to a probation officer. Brent gets probation for causing the accident.

Restitution (Chapter 3, The Afterlife): Making good for a loss or for damage. Similar to atonement, but without the emotional component.

Karass (Chapter 3, The Afterlife): A group of people who are spiritually linked. From the book Cat’s Cradle by Kurt Vonnegut, which Brent had read in school.

Shearwater (Chapter 4, Miami, Florida): A black and white sea bird. Flaco, the streetsweeper, wants to see one.

Concertina (Chapter 5, Twinkle Twinkle Little Star): A small accordion, a squeezebox, often associated as a sound of Italy. Someone in the hostel is playing one.

Suzuki violin (Chapter 6, Bellevue, Washington): A method for teaching young children how to play stringed instruments. Tony has been taking lessons for years, reluctantly.

Apprentice (Chapter 7, Apprentices): A beginner who is learning a craft from an expert. The children on the Florida beach are impromptu and temporary apprentices to Brent.

Contradance (Chapter 9, “Everybody Swing!”): A folk dance where the partners face each other in two lines. Brent participates in one in Maine.

What is metacognition and cognition?

Cognition can be defined as the mental ability or a set of mental processes that are involved in thinking, reasoning, perception, comprehension, making judgments and decisions, etc. In simplest terms, cognition refers to the ‘thought process’. According to some theories of human cognition, the source of all knowledge is primarily our cognitive abilities (Cognitivism) and mind (Mentalism). Some linguists also consider language to be a cognitive ability, and prefer to study acquisition, development and production of language under human cognition, but this is debatable. Metacognition (meta means ‘beyond’) is a relatively newer concept in psychology and psycholinguistics, which refers to the higher order cognitive abilities that allow for cognition of cognitive abilities. In other words, metacognition is the ability to think about thinking, to understand the process of processing information, perception and evaluation, and to reason for the source of reason. Metacognitive abilities are linked with human intelligence and logic.

in "Harrison Bergeron", what does the author assume about the attitudes of the audience in this piece?

In "Harrison Bergeron," Kurt Vonnegut assumes the readers all have a positive attitude about the word "equality" and a similar image of what that would look like in action. So when the story begins, "The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal," the reader assumes a different type of equal. An equal that means the same opportunities for everyone. However, Vonnegut flips this idea on its head and goes on to explain that "Nobody was smarter than anybody else. Nobody was better looking than anybody else. Nobody was stronger or quicker than anybody else." So, in this world, equality does not mean equal rights, but means a lowering of everyone's ability.

Vonnegut's play on the idea of equality is really what makes "Harrison Bergeron" a classic short story. Without this idea, the reader does not shake his head when George Bergeron reacts negatively when his wife suggests he take out a few of the birdshot in his physical handicap. He defends this idea of equality because "we'd be right back in the dark ages again, with everybody competing against everybody else."

It's relatively safe to assume Vonnegut, like his readers, does not share the definition of equality he presents in this story. Instead, he uses this term ironically in order to demonstrate what happens in a society in which people seem afraid to compete and surpass one another.

Can we identify criminals before they have committed any crimes?

This is a very complex ethical question, which you should think about yourself and consider in terms of your own knowledge and values. But here are some things to think about to get you started.

There are really two questions here, interrelated, but not the same:

1. Is it possible to identify and punish criminals before they commit crimes?

2. Is it ethical to identify and punish criminals before they commit crimes?

Part 1 is largely a matter of time. While neuroscience is currently not powerful enough to make strong predictions about future behavior, we already know certain statistical tendencies, such as the fact that most crimes are committed by young men, people with lower incomes and less education are more likely to commit most types of crime, the fact that lead poisoning increases rates of criminal behavior, and the fact that psychopaths, people with extremely low levels of empathy, are far more likely to commit crimes. (I've linked some studies showing some of the risk factors we know contribute to crime.)

We have various methods of psychological and neurological testing by which we could probably estimate someone's probability of committing future crimes better than chance, but still with substantial uncertainty. So for example if the baseline rate of committing homicide is 50 per million (0.005%) per year, we might be able to show that a poor, uneducated young male psychopath with severe lead poisoning has a much higher, say 1% chance of committing homicide in the next 10 years.

Note that this still means there is a 99% chance this man will not commit homicide. Even if we add up the probability of all crimes he could commit, it's quite likely that with our best neuroscience we could still not do better than predicting a 50% chance of him committing some serious crime at some point in the future.

With this high level of error, it seems obviously unethical to imprison someone for a crime that they still are as likely as not to never actually commit.

But suppose the technology improves over time, as it probably will. How accurate must the prediction be, before we are prepared to use it in crime prevention?

A strict deontologist would probably say that we will never be certain enough, that as long as there is the tiniest chance of error we must grant human beings free will to choose their own fate.

But I am actually quite convinced that no one is really a strict deontologist. It's easy to come up with extreme scenarios in thought experiments which would make just about anyone give up on their moral rules to stop some sufficiently large harm---if you wouldn't kill someone to save 1 life, how about 10? How about 100? How about 1 million? 1 billion?

Deep down I think we are all nuanced consequentialists. Not the sort of naive consequentialist who just adds up the outcomes of this particular action, but a nuanced consequentialist who adds up the outcomes of this action, other actions like it, the precedent it sets, the cultural norms it sustains.

So what would a nuanced consequentalist say? Is there a way to make a society we would want to live in, in which neuroscientists can scan your brain, determine that you have say a 97% chance of committing a crime at some point in the future, and therefore punish you for it?

Many people would say "No", that we would rather live in a world that has occasional murders than a world in which the government has such tyrannical power over our minds. I think that's a legitimate view, and you could argue for it.

But I'd also like you to consider an alternative view which I think is underrepresented. Who said we had to punish them? I sort of assumed that in the above, and most people do. But what if we identified future criminals in order to treat them?

Suppose, for instance, that upon finding this psychopath who has a 97% chance of committing murder in the future, we reprogram his brain in some way---we are, after all, assuming advanced neuroscience technology. Suppose we make him no longer a psychopath; we give him the capacity for empathy he never had. We repair his lead poisoning. We educate him and lift him out of poverty (we should be doing that anyway, right?). Suppose that after all of this we reduce his probability of committing homicide dramatically, from 97% to 1% or even all the way to baseline. Wouldn't that be a good thing? If you were at risk of committing murder, wouldn't you rather get your brain fixed than wait until you kill someone and end up in prison?

Of course, many would disagree with that view as well; a work of literature that argues quite forcefully against it is A Clockwork Orange. But I think it's worth at least talking about. But really the question is: What do you think?

What are the three most common atoms in your body?

The three most common atoms in our body are Oxygen, carbon and hydrogen. Together these constitute almost 93% of our body, with individual contribution being 65% oxygen, 18.5% carbon and 9.5% hydrogen. Our body is mostly made up of water, which is made up of hydrogen and oxygen (in a 2:1 atomic ratio, that is 2 atoms of hydrogen are combined with 1 atom of oxygen). We are organic life forms, that is, our body parts are made up of carbon compounds. The food that we eat and the sugar molecules that we need to break down to generate energy are all carbon-based molecules. The other macromolecules, such as, lipids and proteins are also carbon-based molecules. Thus, our body is mostly composed of carbon, oxygen and hydrogen.

Hope this helps.