If "Me Talk Pretty One Day" is satire, what does it satirize?

If David Sedaris's "Me Talk Pretty One Day" satirizes anything, it's the seriousness—to the point of the instructor insulting students making some cry—with which people take language classes, which he seems to consider a recreational activity. 

In the opening paragraph, Sedaris sets the tone of the essay by clumping language classes in Paris with a series of recreational activities, including the movies, puppet shows, and Festyland, "a far-flung amusement park that advertises with billboards picturing a cartoon stegosaurus sitting in a canoe and eating what appears to be a ham sandwich."

However, for Sedaris, this idea of recreational activity goes away the minute he enters the school and feels completely out of place, or like "Pa Kettle trapped backstage after a fashion show." The first thing his teacher tells him demonstrates her seriousness in teaching the language to these students: "if you have not meimslsxp or lgpdmurct by this time, then you should not be in this room." The teacher then goes on to mock each student in the class who volunteers an answer at one point "accusing the Yugoslavian girl of masterminding a program of genocide."

However, while Sedaris makes light of her teaching style, by the end of the essay he realizes that he was actually understanding French better. By the time mid-October came around, Sedaris says he "could understand every word someone was saying" reveling in the fact the her insults became clear to him.

At the end of the essay, it's clear that this French class, which people take as a form of self-improvement and as something that should be fun, became a somewhat traumatic experience for many of the students.

What is Lady Macbeth's reaction to the other characters' reaction to the murder?

Her first reaction to the others' reaction to the murder was actually not well-planned. When Macduff exclaims that Duncan has been murdered, she asks, "What, in our house?" (2.3.103). This really should not be her first response to the "news" that the king has been the victim of foul play. She should probably shriek and begin to cry so that the others interpret her grief as extreme. Instead, she implies that the most important thing about the murder is that it happened in her house; she should react to the fact that the murder occurred at all. Banquo even points this out when he says, "Too cruel anywhere" (2.3.104). In other words, he subtly tells her that her response was inappropriate because it seems as though she is more worried about how this could affect her reputation than she is about her dead king.

Then, after Macduff kills the chamberlains, Lady Macbeth seems to faint, as though all of the drama is simply too much for her delicate nature to bear. The stage direction says that "Lady Macbeth is assisted to leave," immediately following line 147 in this same scene. She is, perhaps, trying to cover up her earlier faux pas in responding to the location of Duncan's murder instead of the fact of it; or maybe she's trying to draw some attention away from Macbeth since the others are not pleased with him for killing the guards who seem to have killed Duncan.

So I know the answers are correct but I got -33g of butane and -99 g of co2 why are they not negative?

The given reaction is:

`C_4H_10 + 13/2 O_2 -> 4CO_2 + 5 H_2O`

In the given reaction, butane undergoes combustion and generates carbon dioxide and water. The energy produced in the reaction is 2658 KJ.

To generate, 1.5 x 10^3 KJ or 1500 KJ of energy, 1500/2658 th mole of butane is needed. The molecular mass of butane is 58 gm/mole (= 4 x 12 + 1 x 10).

The mass of butane required is 58 x 1500/2658 = 32.73 gm

And the amount of CO2 generated would be

= 44 x 4 x 1500/2658 = 99.32 gm.

The answers would not be in negative, since the question asks for the amount of butane consumed and the amount of carbon dioxide generated. A negative answer, in reply to these questions, would mean butane is generated and carbon dioxide is consumed; which is clearly not the case. 

The negative answers would have been relevant if the question asked for the amount of butane generated and amount of carbon dioxide consumed. 

Hope this helps. 

What is the "insidious plan" on Page 82 of Fahrenheit 451?

In Part Two of Fahrenheit 451, Faber suggests an "insidious plan" to Montag. He proposes that they plant books in the homes of other firemen and then turn in the alarm so that these houses are burned. The purpose of this act is to create so much "suspicion" among firemen that the system is destroyed from the inside.

This "insidious plan" comes as a response to Montag's idea to get a printing press and create a new supply of books. While Faber is terrified of rebelling against the government, he is prepared to adopt a plan if he is certain that it will do enough damage ("get me burnt for my trouble").

In Part Three, Montag puts this plan into action when he breaks into the home of his fellow fireman, Black, and plants some books in his kitchen. Montag leaves the house and then calls in the alarm from a phone booth outside. It is now just a matter of time before the firemen come to burn Black's house. 

Describe the uninvited guest in "The Masque of the Red Death."

The masked figure appears suddenly at twelve midnight. Neither Prospero nor any of his guests had noticed this figure prior to this moment. The guests are initially disapproving, and then quickly move to feelings of terror and horror. 

Even though there are many people dressed up, this figure stands out. The narrator says he "out-Heroded Herod." This is a reference to the Biblical figure Herod, but also a nod to Hamlet, in which Hamlet mocks the actors for being too dramatic. In short, the figure conjures the image of an unsavory and dramatic character. 

The mask itself looks quite similar to that of a "stiffened corpse." He also has the signs and symptoms of the red death: 

His vesture was dabbled in blood—and his broad brow, with all the features of the face, was besprinkled with the scarlet horror. 

The masked figure looks like a victim of the red death. The red death is precisely what the guests are trying to escape and (selfishly) ignore. Prospero orders his guests to unmask the figure. They make an initial move, but stop, too terrified to approach. Prospero dies when trying to confront this personified Red Death. The guests finally confront him, only to find the figure has no tangible, physical form under the disguise. The figure had been like a ghost or perhaps a collective hallucination on the part of Prospero and his guests. From the reader's perspective, the figure might also be a metaphor. In other words, his personified form is Poe's way of giving death a willful, maniacal presence. 

If anyone has read Fast Food Nation by Eric Schlosser, could you answer the following question: Are there any downsides to government control over...

There are a few major downsides to government control of the food processing system. Because regulation and regulators tend to favor large producers, it can be extremely difficult for smaller producers to meet the demands of the regulations and still make a profit. This stifles competition and isn't healthy for small producers or consumers in the long run.

Another downside is the fact that large corporate producers have a great deal of influence over legislation and in a sense regulate themselves. The food industry is a classic example of "regulatory capture" so it isn't always clear that legislation actually makes food safer as much as it protects the profits of the industry.

Arguably the largest downside of government oversight is that it provides the illusion of safety but tends to be inadequately funded so there are never enough regulators or inspectors to even provide cursory examinations. So most producers get to stamp their products with the USDA seal of approval while only very rarely actually being subject to inspection. This has led to an increasing number of food-borne illness problems around the country.

How does Anne Frank feel towards her sister?

Anne Frank does not reveal a great deal about Margot Frank in her diary. Margot is three years older and there tends to be a little bit of sibling rivalry or jealousy in her writing about her sister.  Anne paints Margot in a boring way, referring to her as quiet, tidy, and an overachiever.  Anne does not think that she has much of a personality.  Margot envisions that she has a bright future after the war. The older sister hopes to go to school and become a maternity nurse in Palestine.

Anne dismisses Margot as standoffish and introverted.  She discusses different fights that she has with her sister while in hiding.  Anne does mention Margot in a positive light when detailing a letter that she received in support of her friendship with Peter.  Despite this mention of Margot, Anne does not consider Margot her friend and does not think very much of their relationship. For this reason, Margot does not get very much space in the Diary of Anne Frank. 

Why is the bar in The Catcher in the Rye important? Does it represent cultural criticism? How?

Setting is very important in Salinger's The Catcher in the Rye because Holden either experiences or learns something profound at almost every place. Holden rides trains and cabs, walks the street, stays in the bad part of town, and participates in conversations with all walks of life from nuns to prostitutes. Holden goes to the Wicker Bar to meet and older, former classmate. He has socialized with all kinds of people who disappoint him so far, and at this point in the story, he's going to try to fit in with someone he actually looks up to, named Carl Luce. He describes the bar in the following way:

". . . the Wicker Bar is in this sort of swanky hotel, the Seton Hotel. . . It's one of those places that are supposed to be very sophisticated and all, and the phonies are coming in the window" (141).

Holden goes on to criticize the French girls who play and sing each night, the bartender who is apparently a "louse," (142) and the audience who simply cheers for everything. Holden believes the whole place is fake and swimming with fake people. This is how Holden views society and the culture he lives around. Bars, in many places, are the social centers for the community. One goes there to feel accepted among those of the same class. In this case, the Wicker Bar represents upper-class society and Holden does his best to fit in there with Luce, but ultimately fails. If the bar represents society, this would suggest that Holden would not fit in as he is, and that would be very upsetting for him.

Symbolically, what's interesting about Hughes' description of Mrs. Jones' purse in the story Thank You, Ma'am by Langston Hughes?

The way the purse is described in Langston Hughes' "Thank you Ma'am" is interesting for several reasons. 

The first would be that the purse is described as "large," which is the same adjective used to describe the woman herself. The sentence reads: "She was a large woman with a large purse that had everything in it but hammer and nails." Right away, we can connect the large woman and the large purse as being similar, and the purse is a metaphor for the woman herself. A metaphor is a symbol, meaning that the metaphor of the purse represents the woman, or an idea of the woman. 

If the purse is a metaphor for the woman, it's also interesting when Hughes describes that the purse "had everything in it but hammer and nails." These are not usual items that would be described as being in a purse. Purses are usually dainty things, carrying items like makeup and other toiletries. This woman's purse is not one of those purses. It carries much more than little things like makeup. It's carrying her whole life, it seems, with as much in it as she can fit. 

This idea is interesting because it relates back to who the woman is, as the purse is a metaphor for her. Based on the description of the purse, we can say something about her character. She's tough and strong, no-nonsense. She's practical. Perhaps she works a lot, or travels around a lot. She's down-to-Earth. In this way, as the story progresses, the purse tells us more about who she is. This is why the purse is interesting. 

How can we clean up the air?

There are a number of ways we can clean up our air. The easiest way is to plant more trees, since they undergo photosynthesis and consume carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and generate oxygen. During this process, they remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and increase the concentration of oxygen in the atmosphere. Another significant contribution would be to minimize the consumption of fossil fuels, such as coal, petroleum products, etc. These fuels, on combustion, generate carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, soot, particulate matter, etc. All of these are harmful to us, either directly or indirectly. Instead of fossil fuels, we can use renewable sources of energy, such as wind energy, solar energy, etc. Or, we can switch over to cleaner fuels, such as nuclear energy or more efficient combustion systems. We can also ensure that gaseous emissions from our vehicles and industries are properly cleaned (scrubbed to remove harmful gases and particulate matter) before they are emitted to the atmosphere.

Hope this helps.  

What spooks Macbeth while he waits to kill Duncan?

When Macbeth enters the chamber to kill Duncan he is alarmed by the fact that Donalbain is lodged in the next chamber.  He believes that Donalbain and his brother Malcolm awaken before the murder and catch sight of him in the hallway.  One of the men cries out in his sleep "God bless us" and "Amen" to which Macbeth cannot return the response "Amen."  Further, Macbeth believes that he hears one of the men cry "Sleep no more!/ Macbeth does murder sleep" as he enters the chamber to kill Duncan.  This leaves Macbeth deeply shaken because Macbeth cannot utter the phrase "Amen" signifying his evil-doing and inability to ever be holy again.  He also is left thinking about how he has condemned Duncan to an eternal sleep, for which he will lose much sleep due to his immense guilt.  All of these things put together leave Macbeth deeply disturbed and he does not fully follow through with the original plan, returning to Lady Macbeth with the guard's daggers.  She then has to return the daggers to the guards in order to cover up the murder.

Where did Kit live before going on this journey in The Witch of Blackbird Pond?

Kit lived in Barbados before moving to Wethersfield.

After Kit’s mother and father died, she was raised by her grandfather in Barbados.  Barbados was at the time a British colony in the Caribbean.  Kit’s grandfather was wealthy enough to have a plantation and many slaves.  She led a privileged life.

Kit much prefers Barbados to Connecticut.  Whereas Connecticut is cold and mostly underdeveloped, Barbados was warm and beautiful.  Kit is disappointed when she first sees America.

The bleak line of shore surrounding the gray harbor was a disheartening contrast to the shimmering green and white that fringed the turquoise bay of Barbados which was her home. The earthen wall of the fortification that faced the river was bare and ugly, and the houses beyond were no more than plain wooden boxes. (Ch. 1)

Moving to Wethersfield is a big adjustment for Kit.  She is used to having slaves do all of the household work.  However, that is not how things are done in Wethersfield.  Hard work is constant.  The people also do not approve of her reading choices, because she reads Shakespeare in addition to the Bible.  That is considered inappropriate by the Puritans, who think Barbados is a “heathen island.”

Kit’s ways are unusual, but one of the other problems is that she never told her Connecticut family members that she was coming.  She just showed up.

 "Yours? Seven trunks? What can be in them?"

"Why--my clothes, and a few things of Grandfather's."

"Seven trunks of clothes, all the way from Barbados just for a visit?" (Ch. 3)

Kit had to explain that she was not just visiting, but wanted to stay with them.  For them, this meant one more mouth to feed and someone else to squeeze into their house.  Kit did not know how to do any of their chores, so she was next to worthless.

Nat compared Kit to a tropical bird, like those that could be found in Barbados.  She simply did not fit in there in Connecticut with the harsh winters and even harsher rules.  Although she tried to accept their way of life, she eventually decided that she did not need to change who she was, and married Nat instead of a Puritan.

1. What are some alternatives to Freud’s focus on childhood sexuality that might also explain adult psychological difficulties? 2. Freud’s view...

Over the years, numerous theories about children and adult psychology have developed. One popular theory is Freud’s theory about childhood sexuality influencing adults; however, other theories also have formed that explain child development.

Some alternative theories to Freud’s theories include Vygotsky’s theories and the Behaviorism theory. Vygotsky believed that children develop their “Zone of Proximal Development” or “ZPD” (their level of ability) by learning through a process termed “scaffolding.” With this, children reach higher levels of development through interaction with others on a higher ZPD level (such as parents or teachers). According to this theory, if children have proper scaffolding, they can develop into productive individuals. On the other hand, Behaviorism illustrates that children develop based on the behaviors that are allowed and encouraged (such as through positive and negative reinforcement). According to this theory, children need correct behavior enforced to become beneficial adults.

Although these two theories are not as focused on sexuality, they reveal alternate perspectives about the development of adult sexuality. For example, with proper scaffolding, children can become beneficial and well-rounded adults (sexuality included) according to Vygotsky. Furthermore, with Behaviorism, if children experience beneficial positive and negative reinforcement, they would become sexually healthy adults as well. However, without the reinforcement, repercussions, such as a non-healthy sexual life could occur.

As a result of Freud’s background in Vienna, many scholars have speculated about how it impacted his theories. However, his theories are still being applied and analyzed by scholars today. Although most scholars reject aspects of his theories, they still use many of the basic components to speculate and create new theories today. Thus, although some scholars may avoid aspects of his theories today, they are still praised and utilized by many modern psychologists.

Sources

Santrock, John W. Children. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2010. Print.

States of matter: Solids , liquids and gases.

Instead of directly solving your assignment, I will provide you with sufficient information that will help you solve the assignment.

There are three states of matter: solids, liquids and gases (plasma is the fourth state). These states are differentiated based on their unique properties. A solid has a fixed shape & volume, does not flow and cannot be compressed. A liquid in comparison, is incompressible, flows and does not have a fixed shape. A liquid has a fixed volume. A gas does not have a fixed shape or volume, can flow and is compressible.

Using these properties, we can classify any given material. For example, material B (Q 2) flows and has a fixed volume and hence will be classified as a liquid. In comparison, material A is a Gas. You can similarly solve the other parts.

Hope this helps.

What is an example of an anachronism in "Harrison Bergeron"?

An anachronism occurs when a thing appears in a time period other than the one in which it was appropriately used. For example, the use of a telegraph machine in a story set in the future would demonstrate anachronism because telegraphs were developed in the 1800s and are essentially extinct. Harrison Bergeron is set in the year 2081 where everyone is equal due to the use of handicaps and masks that render everyone average. While Hazel and George are watching TV, their son appears on the screen and announces that he is the new emperor. He peels off his handicaps and begins to dance. Not far into the dance, the Handicapper General appears. It is in this moment that there is an example of an anachronism. She takes out a ten-gauge shotgun and kills Harrison and the woman he is dancing with. This is an anachronism because shotguns would be extremely outdated in 2081, and therefore not fit in with the setting of the story at all. It is possible that they were killed with such an archaic instrument because they were reverting back to the ways of the past, such as not having handicaps and allowing the world to see their true faces. The use of the shotgun shows how primitive Harrison's behavior is and how ridiculous it would be to live in a world without complete equality.

What are some literary devices used by the author of Into the Wild?

The author of Into the Wild is John Krakauer.  He makes use of a lot of different literary devices.  I'll pick three literary devices that I believe that Krakauer uses to great effect during the novel.  

The first is anecdotes.  An anecdote is a short and interesting story that is often used to support or demonstrate some point.  While most of the book is focused on Krakauer explaining McCandless's final months, Krakauer does at times leave that narrative in order to discuss something from his own life.  

As a youth, I am told, I was willful, self-absorbed, intermittently reckless, moody. I disappointed my father in the usual ways. Like McCandless, figures of male authority aroused in me a confusing medley of corked fury and hunger to please.

Krakauer's anecdotal evidence serves as a way to show readers that McCandless wasn't a complete anomaly.  The anecdotes also help readers better understand why Krakauer feels a connection to McCandless. 

Another literary device used by Krakauer is similar to anecdotes.  Krakauer uses comparisons to great effect.  He devotes two entire chapters to comparing McCandless to Gene Rosellini, John Waterman, Carl McCunn, and Everett Ruess.

The third literary device that Krakauer frequently uses during the novel is flashback.  Krakauer does not narrate McCandless's journey in chronological order.  The novel begins with McCandless being dropped off at the start of the Stampede Trail.  The book then flashes back to various times in McCandless's life that led up to his death.  Krakauer even narrates about times when McCandless was in high school.  

Why do the formation of military alliances increase the likelihood of a country going to war?

The tangled web of military alliances that were signed before World War I is considered one of the underlying causes of World War I. Without the network of alliances that existed in Europe during the early Twentieth Century, it is possible that the conflict in the Balkans may have stayed in the Balkans. Why did the formation of these alliances have such a profound effect? The answer is because of military obligations that are inherent in signing a treaty for an alliance.

The answer to this question is one of elementary mathematics.  If a country has made military alliances with four countries, the likelihood of war has been increased four-fold. On the other hand, if a country remains isolated and does not agree to alliances, they will go to war only if they are attacked or their own interests are in peril.  

Give a character sketch of Mr. Jefferson from The Story of My Life.

Mr. Jefferson (his full name was Joseph Jefferson, 1829-1905) was a talented actor who was a friend of Helen Keller. In her book, The Story of My Life, she describes going to see him when she was studying in New York, and she felt his movements while playing Rip Van Winkle. While she had read the play, she only understood what she describes as "the charm of Rip's slow, quaint, kind ways" after she visits Mr. Jefferson and feels his movements in the play. She describes his acting as beautiful and pathetic, meaning it creates pathos or sympathetic feeling, in the audience. Helen Keller goes behind the stage and is allowed to feel Mr. Jefferson's face, hair, and costume so that she can really experience the play.

Helen Keller also visits Mr. Jefferson in Boston, where he acts out his part from The Rivals. She is allowed to feel the movements of the play, and he also asks her to guess which gestures should go along with the actions in Rip Van Winkle. Mr. Jefferson is clearly a compassionate and patient man with a great deal of sympathy and interest in helping Helen Keller and encouraging her love of the theatre. 

What are 4 characteristics of Walter Mitty in the story "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty" and what is the textual evidence?

Walter Mitty certainly is a daydreamer. He spends most of his time imagining he is somewhere else, doing extraordinary things. From this, we can conclude that he is absentminded. In other words, he is so enchanted by his own thoughts that he ignores the "real" outside world. His wife must shout at him when he drives too fast. He drives in the wrong lane in the parking lot because he is lost in his own thoughts. 

In his real life, Walter is incompetent. He might be more competent if he would pay attention but, again, he is always lost in thought. He constantly makes mistakes. Note the parking lot mishap and his failed attempt to remove the chains from his tires. 

Walter feels alienated from modern life and society. There is little to no room for adventure in modern life. Walter has probably been dismayed by the mundane redundancy of his modern life and the lack of excitement in going to the same job day after day. Because of this alienation, Walter creates his own adventures in his mind. 

Walter is an introvert. He is not especially good or comfortable in social situations and/or dealing with other people. He is much more at home in his own mind. Introversion is described as "the state of or tendency toward being wholly or predominantly concerned with and interested in one's own mental life." Walter's daydreams are much more interesting (to him and the reader) than his external life is. Introverts tend to be more interested in solitary activities and there is nothing more solitary and subjective than thinking and daydreaming. 

What is the density of a block of marble that occupies 220 cm3 and has a mass of 876 g? Answer in units of g/cm3 .

The density of a substance is given as the ratio of its mass and density. In mathematical terms,

Density = mass/volume.

Since mass has units of grams or kilograms, and volume has common units of mL, L or m^3; the units of density are gm/ml, g/cm^3 or kg/m^3.

In the given case, the mass of marble block is given as 876 gm and its volume is 220 cm^3. The density of the marble block is, thus

Density = mass/volume = 876/220 g/cm^3 

= 3.98 gm/cm^3 

The density is 3.98 gm/cm^3.

Another term related to density, is the specific gravity of a substance. It is given as the ratio of density of the substance to that of water. Since the density of water is about 1 g/cm^3, the specific gravity of the given marble block is 3.98.

Hope this helps.

Explain the similarities and differences between modern globalization and the globalization that occurred during the Age of Exploration.

The first exchange of culture and ideas happened after the expeditions of Christopher Columbus.  The native people of the Americas and Europeans from England, Spain, and Portugal were in contact with one another for the first time. The first exchange was primarily plants, animals, and diseases.  It is somewhat different than the globalization of today because these cultures did not even know each other existed before contact.  Consider the following differences between the Columbian Exchange and 21st Century globalization.

• Today corporations are leading the charge to gain influence and power in other cultures while in the Age of Exploration nations or monarchs sponsored expeditions.


• The major target of corporate imperialism today is a search for cheap labor markets; in the past, it was a push was for land and resources.


• A motivation for contacts with other people during the time of Columbus was to convert natives to Christianity.  There is no such religious motive for contact today.  

There are a number of similarities between modern-day globalization and the imperial practices of the 15th Century.  Consider the following similarities.  

• Both globalization accelerations were done to create wealth or profit.


• In both instances, a dominant player attempted to force their culture on a subordinate culture.


• In both cases, both sides (dominant and subordinate) benefited in some way from the contact with one another.  


• Both examples of globalization in the question possess the theme of exploitation.  This is the exploitation of a technologically inferior group by a technologically superior group.

Explain how enzymes speed up the rate of biochemical reactions by lowering the energy needed to start reaction ?

Enzymes are catalysts that speed up the rate of a reaction by providing an alternate pathway that has a much lower activation energy, as compared to the original (non-catalyzed) pathway. Activation energy is the energy barrier that must be overcome for the reaction to take place. Note that enzymes do not lower the energy barrier, rather they provide an alternate route to the reaction. Enzymes do so by two mechanisms: It brings the reactants close to each other and in orientations that facilitate the formation of bonds at lower activation energy. This is facilitated by provision of active sites by the enzymes. Another mechanism is easing out the transformation of reactants to the transition state, by stretching the bonds in the reactant molecules. The reactants, then find it easier and less energy intensive to convert to transition state and then to final products. 

Hope this helps.

What is imperialism?

Imperialism is when a stronger nation controls a weaker nation politically and economically. Many countries were imperialistic by 1900 including the United States and Great Britain.

There were several reasons why countries were imperialistic. One reason was to help their economy. Countries that established colonies were able to get raw materials cheaper from their colonies than by purchasing them from other countries. Additionally, these countries had a guaranteed market where they could sell their products.

Another reason was to expand a country’s political and military power. Having colonies allowed a country to have bases around the world that could be used in time of war. These colonies could also serve as ports where their ships could get resupplied. By having colonies, countries had more political power and more military power.

Colonies also allowed a country to protect its trade. Without colonies, it is more difficult for a country to protect its world trade. The colonies could serve as spots where ships can operate and stay in order to protect the merchant marine if needed.

Some countries wanted colonies because they wanted to spread their way of living. They believed their way of living was better than the way of living in the colonies. They felt it was their obligation to spread their way of living to improve the lives of people living in their colonies.

What are good techniques for effective studying?

Studying is hard work.  And there is no magic way that works for every single person out there.  The way that you study can depend on the subject matter as well.  For math, I believe that the best way to study is through repetition of the types of problems that you will encounter.  The repetition will help build and instill confidence in your ability to solve problems, and you eventually develop habitual skills about what actions need to be taken next depending on the types of problems being asked.  

If you are studying for a literature test, you need to spend time going over the "guts" of stories.  That means for any possible story/poem that might be on the test, you need to know what the overall plot is, who the main characters are, what the conflict is, where the setting takes place, and what the themes are.  In addition to knowing the themes, be sure to take time reviewing and finding sections of the text that support each theme.  Practice writing out compare and contrast lists of characters.  That will help you study, and it will point out gaps in your knowledge.  

For other subjects like history and science there is a lot of facts and vocabulary to know, so memorization of names, dates, and parts is critical.  Some people are good with that kind of thing, but many of my students find large amounts of success with flash cards.  Flashcards are an easy self quizzing tool, but they also have the benefit of being able to be handed to somebody else.  That person can quiz you.  

There are other subtle ways to help yourself study as well.  You want to study in an atmosphere similar to the atmosphere that you will be taking the test in.  That means you should study at a table or desk in a quiet room.  Without listening to music.  There are lots of studies out there that link memory recall ability to environmental ques.  Your testing environment and your studying environment should compliment each other in their similarity in order to trigger those ques.  One last weird one.  Study with a mint and take the test with a mint.  There are a number of studies that have linked mint to increasing cognitive function.  I've linked one of them.  

List three changes in transportation in the 1700s and explain each. It is for the Industrial Revolution in Britain.

Improvements in transportation in the 1700s made it easier for manufacturers to transport goods.  Factories during the Industrial Revolution in Britain produced mass amounts of goods, such as textiles.  They produced much more than was needed within the immediate areas around the factories.  Manufacturers needed to transport goods throughout Britain.  With improvements in transportation, shipping goods became more practical and efficient.

Goods could be transported by horse and wagon.  Wagons became larger in size during the 18th century.  Innovations in wagon parts (such as axels and wheels) also made it so that stagecoaches could travel at faster speeds, delivering goods in less time.

Turnpike trusts were established to fund roads and road maintenance.  Prior to the establishment of turnpike trusts, roads often fell into disrepair.  This made travel difficult and slow.  Turnpike roads were better maintained, and this made for easier travel.

Ships and boats were also used to transport goods in the 18th century.  More rivers were made navigable and sailing vessels improved.  Issues of property rights along rivers were addressed, making more waterways accessible to the public.  Many towns and cities were not along rivers, and therefore could not send or receive goods by boat.  This problem was addressed by the building of canals.  The design of the ships improved, and they were made larger to hold more goods.  Docks and loading areas were also developed to receive and load more goods.

Why did Sam name his bird "Frightful"?

Interesting question! In the book My Side of the Mountain by Jean Craighead George, Sam desires to possess and train a falcon. Although Sam realizes that this will be an exceptionally challenging task, he overcomes the many difficulties to fulfill his goal.

Foremost, Sam must climb a cliff to obtain his falcon. With this experience, Sam overcomes the physical intensity and mental fear of climbing a cliff.

Furthermore, Sam must take a baby falcon from her mother’s possession. After Sam reaches the baby falcons, the baby's mother attacks Sam. As the text reveals:

“She [the falcon’s mother] had hit me. She winged out, banked, and started back for another strike.”

After overcoming all of these monumental barriers, Sam finally possesses his falcon. He names the bird “Frightful” because of the horrifying experiences he encounters to get her. As the text demonstrates:

“Frightful, as I called her right then and there because of the difficulties we had had in getting together. . .”

Is there a serious message in Saki's short story "The Open Window"?

The story is intentionally funny, but there is a serious message. It is that we shouldn't try to impose our problems on other people, especially on strangers. Other people have plenty of problems of their own. When it comes to health problems, we can't expect other people to offer us medical or psychiatric advice. The best they can do is suggest that we consult a professional. In Framton's case it appears that he has already been consulting doctors in the city, so he can hardly expect to get worthwhile advice from a family of strangers like the Sappletons. Saki points this out in a direct comment in the story and in his description of Mrs. Sappleton's behavior.

"The doctors agree in ordering me complete rest, an absence of mental excitement, and avoidance of anything in the nature of violent physical exercise," announced Framton, who laboured under the tolerably widespread delusion that total strangers and chance acquaintances are hungry for the least detail of one's ailments and infirmities, their cause and cure. "On the matter of diet they are not so much in agreement," he continued.

"No?" said Mrs. Sappleton, in a voice which only replaced a yawn at the last moment. 

Does Framton seem to be fishing for an invitation to stay for dinner when he indicates that, as far as his doctors are concerned, he can eat just about anything. 

Fifteen-year-old Vera not only finds their guest boring and not only shows no sympathy for his "nerves," but she is planning to give him a scare which will produce just the opposite of what his doctors recommended: complete rest, an absence of mental excitement, and avoidance of anything in the nature of violent physical exercise. The fact that we do not feel any sympathy for Framton, even when he goes flying out of the house and up the road, suggests that the author has no sympathy for such neurotic personalities either. 

What will happen if Atticus and Tom lose the appeal?

I’m a little confused by your question because there is no appeal in the case against Tom in the rape of Mayella Ewell.  After the initial trial, Tom is immediately sent to the state prison where he attempts to escape.  Tom is shot 17 times and is killed trying to scale the prison fence.  There is a little mystery surrounding why Tom would try to escape.  I think Tom realizes that even an appeal will not be enough to find him innocent of the charges.  Despite Atticus’ encouragement, as a black man, Tom knows he doesn’t have a chance convincing a jury of his innocence because of the institutionalized racism in places like the justice system in the South. If there had been an appeal, and Tom was still found guilty, he would have been sent to the electric chair for the rape of a white woman. Tom also knows that he is leaving his family behind to struggle without him to help provide for them.  Perhaps he feels that he can somehow escape with his family to a better place.  It is not told why Tom tries to escape, but as readers, we know that it is not because he is guilty.

With The Great Gatsby, is Fitzgerald writing a love story that embraces American ideals, or a satire that comments on American ideals?

I think that Fitzgerald's feelings about the American ideals in the 1920s were decidedly negative and I highly doubt that The Great Gatsby celebrates those ideals in any way. Reading the book for the first time is an overwhelming experience, and the dazzling images of grandeur that the book invokes at nearly every turn can be blinding and alluring. Initially, I, too, wondered if this story embraces the high and exciting lifestyle of the wealthy in those days, which is part of what makes this book so impressive. The Great Gatsby perfectly describes the romping and glimmering world of the rich in the 1920s and even lets the audience grow fond of it before declaring in no uncertain terms that all this money and brilliance masks a brutal and harsh reality.

Fitzgerald wrote a wonderful social commentary about the age he was living in, yet it doesn't entirely qualify as a satire. While the story clearly possesses some satirical elements, perhaps most clearly present in the character of Tom Buchanan, it lacks the immense and comical irony that is so often in other famous works of satire, such as The Importance of Being Earnest and An Ideal Husband by Oscar Wilde. 

“In matters of grave importance, style, not sincerity, is the vital thing.” 

“I never change, except in my affections.” 

Both these quotes from the third act of The Importance of Being Earnest embody the dual function of a satire: to be humorous while simultaneously surprisingly accurate about the true nature of some aspect of society. To be totally fair, some of Tom Buchanan's lines are funny to a certain degree because of their utter stupidity. 

“'This idea is that we’re Nordics. I am, and you are, and you are, and ——' After an infinitesimal hesitation he included Daisy with a slight nod, and she winked at me again. '— And we’ve produced all the things that go to make civilization — oh, science and art, and all that. Do you see?'”

This is a quote from chapter 1 of The Great Gatsby and it is of Tom explaining why, for some faux scientific reason, the "white race" is superior. In the very next paragraph Nick remarks to himself that there was something pathetic about it all. Indeed, Tom's various racist and sexist lines are moderately funny, mostly because of their extreme and idiotic absurdity. Even Daisy is shown to find his ridiculous remarks mildly entertaining. Yet, more than anything, these lines are understandably offensive and unsettling, especially when one considers that Nick is "friends" with this horrible man. 

Although some might disagree, this story is far too grim and hopeless to qualify as a true satire. The social commentary inherent in The Great Gatsby is powerful and immensely striking, yet for vastly different reasons than that of social commentaries like The Importance of Being Earnest and An Ideal Husband. Both of these stories have happy endings and are comedies by nature. The Great Gatsby ends with two deaths and with Nick Carraway leaving West Egg. The story, despite some of its humorous dialogue, is ultimately nearer to a great tragedy than to a comedy. 

In To Kill a Mockingbird, what is the significance of the quotation: "If anybody sees a white nigger around, that's the one?"

This quotation occurs in Chapter 6 of Harper Lee's novel To Kill a Mockingbird. The children, Jem and Scout, have managed to sneak into the grounds of the Radley place and are exploring. Nathan Radley, Boo's older brother, hears intruders but does not know their identity. He assumes that the intruders are black people trying to steal collard greens from his vegetable garden. He fires a shotgun blindly to scare off the intruders and the children run away.

Later, after Nathan recounts the story to a crowd that gathered after hearing the noise of the shot, Miss Stephanie comments:

"Scared him pale. Says if anybody sees a white nigger around, that's the one."

Both Nathan's mistaken assumption about the identity of the intruders and Miss Stephanie's comment are intended to convey to the reader the racial tensions and racism present in the white community.

How does Ralph in Lord of the Flies show initiative?

Although Ralph is not a natural born leader like Jack is and is not as naturally intelligent as Piggy is, he nevertheless shows significant initiative in the first half of the book. In the first chapter, he is the first to suggest the boys "have a chief to decide things." After being elected chief, he organizes an expedition to explore their location and determine whether it is an island. He sets the rules for using the conch to maintain order in the meetings, and he suggests having a signal fire. He takes the initiative to build shelters for all the boys, even though by the time the third one is built, only he and Simon are committed to it.

During the meeting at dusk after the signal fire has gone out, Ralph takes the initiative to address the fear that is troubling the boys, but that ends up backfiring on him. Also in that meeting, he takes the initiative to address the use of fire to assure everyone that there will be no more runaway fires like the one they had on the first day. When a group of boys goes to look for the "beast from air," Ralph takes the initiative to go by himself to the area where they believe the beast may be.

However, beginning in chapter 8, Ralph loses hope, saying, "So we can't have a signal fire...We're beaten." Especially after Jack's rebellion and Simon's death, Ralph becomes significantly weakened and depends more and more on Piggy to help him remain focused. His fear and discouragement keep him from continuing to take initiative.

Why can't copper be made into a magnet?

Magnetism results from the alignment of an atom's outer electrons. There are three types of magnetism:

• Diamagnetism-atoms that have no unpaired outer electrons are repelled by a magnetic field.


• Paramagnetism-atoms that have unpaired electrons are attracted to a magnetic field. These two types of magnetic forces are only observable in the presence of a magnetic field.


• Ferromagnetism - exists in some atoms with unpaired d-electrons and results in permanent magnetic domains that are strong enough to be detected.

Of the three, only ferromagnetism is permanent. Iron, nickel, cobalt and some of the rare earth elements are ferromagnetic.

Copper is diamagnetic because of its electron configuration:

[Ar] 3d10 4s1

The 3d orbital is filled before the 4s because a full sub-level of electrons creates stability. The d-orbital can hold a maximum of 10 electrons, so copper has no unpaired d-electrons.

Magnets can be made from substances that have permanent magnetic domains. Exposing the substance to a strong magnetic field while it's in a molten state will cause the magnetic domains to line up in the same direction and then stay that way when the substance solidifies. Pure copper can't be made into a magnet because it doesn't have these magnetic domains. However, scientists have been able to create a magnet by alternating layers of copper with layers of carbon. The carbon must be in a special form called a buckyball.

In Lord of the Flies, what does this quote mean: "The rock struck Piggy a glancing blow from chin to knee; the conch exploded into thousand white...

It literally means that Piggy is struck (and killed) by the rock and the conch is destroyed. Symbolically, it means that the talisman which represented order and civilized behavior has also been destroyed. The conch initially established order on the island. Ralph had used it to summon the boys to meetings. He who held the conch was permitted to speak. The conch kept the boys in check. It became a symbol of order and reason. As the novel progresses, more and more boys move to Jack's camp, becoming more like savages. The conch loses its "power" to sustain order. When Piggy and the conch are destroyed, the conch had already lost most of its power, but its destruction makes it complete. 

Piggy is the most intellectual of the boys. He is always trying to reason with them to keep the fire going and to be responsible. With his death, they lose whatever sense of reason and civilized ways they had left. It is tragically fitting that Piggy and the conch are destroyed together. Both the object and the character symbolize reason and order. With their mutual destruction, all of the boys (sans Ralph) have devolved into savagery. Piggy, the voice of reason, and the conch, the symbol of order, die together. 

What is the meaning of this phrase from the novel The Stone Angel? " I wonder if she stands there yet, in memory of her who relinquished her...

In The Stone Angel, Hagar Shipley is the protagonist of the novel. At ninety, she is forced to realize that her days are numbered. However, as she reminisces about her life, she comes to understand that her personal failures stem from her pride and her inability to forgive, the same challenges which have haunted her father all of his life.

By all indications, Hagar breathes her first breath on earth just as her mother breathes her last. The quote you ask about constitutes the very first paragraph of the novel. In this paragraph, Hagar tells us that the stone angel used to stand on a hill, above the town. The fact that the stone angel no longer stands is a significant symbol in the novel.

Hagar's father commissions the building of the stone angel to memorialize his wife after her death. His pride is encapsulated in his desire to preserve his wife's memory and life beyond her death. The quote tells us that he wished to preserve his wife's bones and her dynasty for eternity. The stone angel itself is a paradox as we normally think of angels as kind and compassionate beings. We don't associate angels with cold, hard stone or marble. Effectively, the stone statue represents the shutting off of emotion, the coldness of an unforgiving heart, and the hopelessness of self-righteous pride. All these attributes characterize the life of Hagar up until the present, a state of affairs she must remedy if she desires to die in peace.

Explain the dramatic irony of Duncan's reaction when he arrives at Macbeth's castle.

Dramatic irony is used whenever the audience knows more than the character, and by the time Duncan arrives at Macbeth's castle, we certainly know a great deal more about his fate than he does. He compliments their home, saying, "This castle hath a pleasant seat. The air / Nimbly and sweetly recommends itself / Unto our gentle senses" (1.6.1-3). He would not think this castle so "pleasant" and sweet if he knew that its occupants, his friends and subjects, were planning to murder him that night. 

Further, Duncan calls Lady Macbeth his "Fair and noble hostess" (1.6.30). He is unaware that she is, even now, feigning her loyalty and desire to serve him. She claims to be grateful for "those honors deep and broad wherewith / [His] Majesty loads [their] house" (1.6.21-22). But, as the audience knows, she is in the process of plotting how best to stab him and frame his chamberlains so that her husband can ascend to the throne.

Dramatic irony here (as is often the case) is used to heighten the tension for the audience. We know the truth, and we know how completely trusting Duncan is, and so this really ramps up our anxiety as the evening progresses.

Lord Tom - is he a hero or a villain? How can I support my decision that he is one or the other?

Leon Garfield's Lord Tom is certainly an enigmatic character. In order to determine whether he is a hero or a villain, we must first define what these terms mean in literary fiction. The villain is usually the antagonist, the main nemesis in conflict with the protagonist. Protagonists are the main characters who drive the action in any plot; they are what you and I would call heroes. However, this is where it gets interesting. Heroes can be divided into sub-categories. You can have the classical hero, the anti-hero, the Byronic hero (a type of anti-hero), the chosen one or messianic hero, and more.

Four conceptions of the heroic.

The anti-hero.

Now, when we read the text, we see that Lord Tom isn't the protagonist or the main character in the story. He is what we would call an anti-hero; anti-heroes are not always protagonists, although they can be. However, they are almost always important characters in any story. In Smith, Lord Tom is referred to as a 'toby' or highwayman. Smith, our twelve year old protagonist, worships the ground Lord Tom walks on.

Garfield portrays Lord Tom as a scoundrel of sorts; he's proud of his job as a highwayman. He's also wild, unconventional, and suave. Smith tells us that he's a 'dangerous, glittering, murdering adventurer of a gentleman in green.' He's never without his trusted pistol, and when danger approaches, he laughs in its face. Don't look for him to have any qualms about murdering innocents either. He's quite proud of robbing for a living, and relishes the fact that he continues the legacy of well-known highwaymen such as Turpin, Duval, and Captain Robinson. Alas, all of them were hung for their crimes. This morbid bit of knowledge foreshadows Lord Tom's own doom as the story commences.

Whenever Lord Tom comes around to the little cellar apartment Smith shares with his sisters, Miss Fanny and Miss Bridget, he always has exciting stories to tell. When Miss Bridget chastises him about being irresponsible with his loot, he answers unapologetically:

"...Spent, Miss Bridget-as well you know. That's the way of our lives. Risk all for the chase- then spend the profit in high contempt. The chase and the danger's all!... Eat, drink, and be merry, as they say- for tomorrow, we'll all be nubbed!"

However, Lord Tom has a soft spot for Miss Fanny and Smith. In the story, he is Miss Fanny's suitor. When Smith manages to retrieve an important document from a dead man, Mr. Field, Lord Tom tries to get him to hand over the document for safe-keeping. Smith's life is actually in danger, for two 'men in brown' are hot on his heels, in search of the document. However, Smith, despite his great admiration for his hero, doesn't completely trust Lord Tom's intentions. No one knows what the document says; Smith can't read, so he doesn't know either.

As the story continues, Smith does eventually learn how to read. His benefactors, Mr. Mansfield and his daughter, Miss Mansfield, are responsible for his new skill. However, in a comedy of errors, the document comes into the possession of Mr. Mansfield. As for Smith, he is accused of killing Mr. Field and lands in the infamous Newgate Prison. Smith escapes with the help of his sisters and Lord Tom, but more adventure awaits our young hero.

Lord Tom, ever the resourceful highwayman, plans to retrieve the document from Mr. Mansfield himself. However, Smith spies Lord Tom consorting with the 'men in brown' and he anguishes over his hero's fall from grace. Smith is bitterly disappointed in what appears to be Lord Tom's disloyalty. Here, we see a characteristic of the anti-hero: Lord Tom isn't opposed to working both sides of the issue when it suits him. However, it's not really clear in the story whether Lord Tom is just pretending to align himself with the men in brown or if he's really in sync with Smith's enemies.

Either way, as an anti-hero often does, Lord Tom redeems himself when he gives his life to save Smith. That's the difference between an anti-hero and a villain. A villain usually has no redeeming qualities, while an anti-hero who appears to reject traditional moral norms often cherishes a personal code of honor he will never relinquish. In the story, Lord Tom steps in admirably when the 'men in brown' get ready to shoot Smith.

His promise, which he reiterates throughout the novel to Smith, rings true:

"Never fear! Lord Tom's beside you! I'll save you, lad! I'll blow blue daylight through 'em!"

Lord Tom dies in a blaze of glory, and Smith comes to realize that the highwayman has always had his back. Lord Tom may have been a scoundrel, but when the chips were down, he came through for his young apprentice.Anti-heroes may be unconventional, but they mimic the characters of real people in real life. They give the message that anyone can choose to be a hero, even if he/she is imperfect. And that, perhaps, may be the greatest message Lord Tom sends to the readers of Leon Garfield's exciting story.

Hamlet and Claudius are seen as well matched adversaries. Do you agree with this statement?

Claudius committed a murder in order to get possession of the Danish throne. It is natural that he should suspect Hamlet of plotting to do something similar, since Hamlet was his father's legitimate heir and successor. As Macbeth says when contemplating the murder of King Duncan:

But in these cases
We still have judgement here, that we but teach
Bloody instructions, which being taught return
To plague the inventor. This even-handed justice
Commends the ingredients of our poison'd chalice
To our own lips.     (Macbeth, Act 1, Scene 7)

(It is interesting that in Act 5, Scene 2, when Hamlet forces Claudius to drink what is left of the poisoned wine in the goblet which killed Gertrude, he is in fact commending the ingredients of Claudius' poison'd chalice to his own lips.)

Claudius refuses to permit Hamlet to go back to Wittenberg but keeps him a virtual prisoner at Elsinore. If Hamlet had freedom to travel he might seek assistance from some foreign power to stage a coup against Claudius, just as Malcolm does in Shakespeare's Macbeth. Claudius is not satisfied with keeping Hamlet confined to the castle. He keeps his nephew under tight surveillance, using Polonius, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, Gertrude, and even Ophelia as agents. No doubt Claudius has other unidentified courtiers and servants spying on Hamlet as well.

Hamlet is resentful but he is not plotting against Claudius until he meets with his father's ghost in the last scene of Act 1. Now he and Claudius become adversaries. Claudius almost seems to have brought his suspicions into reality. Hamlet decides to pretend to be mad. Why? Because he knows it will be hard to conceal his new knowledge and his new mission from the wily king, who is a shrewd judge of human character. The king might be able to read Hamlet's thoughts in his behavior and his facial expressions or in slips of the tongue. If Claudius was suspicious of Hamlet's intentions when Hamlet had no intentions, how much more so would he become when he sensed that Hamlet was not only plotting to overthrow him, but that Hamlet might suspect that Claudius was guilty of murdering his father. Claudius, too, must hide his thoughts and feelings from his nephew. As Gertrude comments:

So full of artless jealousy is guilt,
It spills itself in fearing to be spilt. (Act 4, Scene 5)

Hamlet knows he is in extreme danger because his uncle has all the power. Claudius could easily have him killed--and he actually attempts to do just that when he sends Hamlet to England with a sealed letter calling for Hamlet's execution. Both these men are afraid of each other, and for the same reason. Claudius is afraid Hamlet will try to kill him to retrieve the throne, and Hamlet is afraid Claudius will try to kill him to prevent him from doing so. Claudius has the power, but Hamlet is loved by the people and is the legitimate successor to his father.

When Hamlet stages the play which replicates the murder Claudius committed, Claudius is horrified. He fears that his nephew has supernatural knowledge, perhaps picked up from exotic books he read at Wittenberg. After all, the story about a poisonous snake biting King Hamlet in his garden is pretty thin. Do they even have poisonous snakes in Denmark? This is why Claudius decides that Hamlet must die, regardless of his concerns for his wife's feelings for her son. And this is also when Hemlet decides that Claudius must die. The King's violent reactions during the pivotal play within a play have shown Hamlet and his good friend Horatio that Claudius is guilty. Hamlet tells Horatio:

O good Horatio, I'll take the ghost's word for a
thousand pound!    (Act 3, Scene 2)

Hamlet is temporarily delayed in attacking the King because he is sent to England and captured by pirates, then released for ransom. But the fact that the main theme of this play is the adversarial relationship between Hamlet and Claudius, their battle of wits, is highlighted by this statement by Hamlet to his mother:

O, 'tis most sweet
When in one line two crafts directly meet.  (Act 3, Scene 4)

How did the Opium War affect China?

The Opium Wars opened China to foreign trade, which was not something that the Chinese were always comfortable with. The treaties that resulted as a consequence of the war sought to change this tradition. Because of their defeat to the British, the ports of the eastern coast of China were opened and foreign trade was established. The treaties also stripped the Chinese of being able to set the tariff rates, which the European powers took advantage of. In general, the treaties stripped China of its ability to control its own economic destiny. The lower tariffs had the effect of crippling the Chinese economy and destroying industries that had flourished in the past.

The increase in trade also hurt the Chinese financial system. It caused a shortage of copper in China and coins could not be minted. The financial system nearly collapsed when the Chinese introduced paper money in 1853. The introduction of foreigners had a cultural impact as well. The country started to westernize its economy and there was talk of democratizing the government, at least at the local level.

Describe the characters of Ivan Vassiliyitch Lomov, Natalia Stepanovna, and Stepan Stepanovitch Tschukobov in A Marriage Proposal.

A Marriage Proposal is a farce that pokes fun of romance and marriage within the upper class as the consideration and pride in property takes precedence over love and marriage with Chekhov's characters. These characters frequently stop listening to each other, often contradict each other, and constantly contradict each other.

• Ivan Vassiliyitch Lomov 

Tschubukov's neighbor, thirty-five-year-old Lomov decides to formally propose marriage to Natalia Stepanovna, although he has known his neighbor for years. When he formally asks Natalia's father, Stepan Tschubukov, he is hugged by this parent. Nevertheless, he is worried that Natalia will refuse and remains nervous. A hypochondriac, Lomov thinks he is cold, and believes he has a roaring in his ears. Further, he complains of a weak heart, insomnia, strange aches, and other ailments.
When he does speak to Natalia, he does not ask her to marry him; instead, he becomes disputatious soon after bringing up the land between their properties. He and Natalia begin shouting, and Lomov threatens to take the Tschubukovs to court. Complaining of his heart, Lomov collapses. When her father complains about Lomov's audacity to propose marriage, Natalia begs her father to bring him back, so Lomov returns, but begins to argue with Natalia about  their dogs. This prompts more spasms and aches until the father intervenes so that they will marry.

• Natalia Stepanovna

With her father's saying that "a dealer has come to buy something," Natalia enters the front room to find there Ivan Vassiliyitch Lomov. She greets him affably. However, it is not long before she argues with Lomov about the meadows, not realizing that he has come to propose marriage. Instead, she speaks vehemently of the injustice of his accusations: "Say what you will, I can't bear injustice."
When Lomov tries to smooth over the situation, Natalia argues that he can explain all he wants, but the meadows still belong to her family. And, when the father enters, the argument continues. Natalia is tenacious; she adamantly insists that the meadows are theirs.
After Lomov leaves, Natalia calls him a "good-for-nothing," and her father adds other words such as "Loafer! Scarecrow! Monster!"
However, soon her father reveals to Natalia that Lomov came to offer her a proposal of marriage. She shouts, "Bring him back! Bring him back!" Soon, too, she begins to argue with Lomov about his dogs.

• Stephan Stepanovitch Tschubukov

Natalia's father, Tschubukov has a little fun with his daughter as he tells her that a dealer has come when Lomov comes to propose. But, when his daughter and Lomov argue, he, too, becomes hysterical, shouting names at Lomov and complaining,

Oh, I know you, you are only waiting to find an excuse to go to the law! You're an intriguer, that what you are! Your whole family were always looking for quarrels. The whole lot!

Then, after his daughter begs him to bring Lomov back, Tschubukov threatens that he will cut his own throat, but he does not. Later, when Lomov collapses, Tschubukov says he should have cut his own throat, after all.

What appeals did the Nazis use? What are some examples?

After World War I, the country of Germany was in a crisis. People were disoriented and looking for answers. As a result, the Nazis were able to use several appeals to encourage people to support them, such as blaming Jews for the country’s problems, lying, and promising peace to the world.

Adolf Hitler, the Nazi and German leader, illustrates a prime example of the appeals that Nazis used. During his stay in prison, Hitler wrote the book Mein Kampf (or in English, My Struggle). Within in this text, Hitler encouraged the Germans to come together to eradicate the Jewish people. By blaming the Jews, Hitler gave the Germans a common enemy, he reunited the country and gave them a cause to fight. As Hitler said in a speech on April 12, 1922: 

It [part of the German government] has completely forgotten that this Jewish democracy with its majority decisions has always been without exception only a means towards the destruction of any existing Aryan [Hitler’s perfect race] leadership.

The Nazis also appeased the Germans by promising them peace and prosperity. Hitler used prolific and passionate speeches to talk with the people and encourage them to join the Nazi’s side. Hitler believed that if a person continued to lie to the people, they would eventually believe it and follow him.

Not only did the Nazis use appeals for their own countrymen, but they also appealed to the rest of the world. After World War I, the League of Nations (similar to the United Nations today) desired peace and rest. Hitler made promises of peace while invading and taking control of entire countries!

What were the effects of Manifest Destiny?

For the United States, the effects of Manifest Destiny were pretty positive.  The main impact was that the United States got much larger and much wealthier.  Manifest Destiny was the idea that God had destined the US to spread out across the continent of North America.  It was not specified how much land the US was to take, but people believed that God wanted the country to expand.  God had destined the US for this because it had the best religion, the best people (racially) and the best culture.  This led to things like the war with Mexico in the 1840s and all of the military actions that pushed Indians off their lands and on to reservations.  These actions greatly increased the size of the US and also made it richer by allowing it to take things like the gold of California and the silver of Nevada.

For others, Manifest Destiny had more negative effects.  For the Native Americans and for Mexico, it meant losing their land.  The Native Americans who were not killed outright in the wars were forced on to reservations where they lost their ability to live freely and to pursue their traditional way of life.  As a country, Mexico was humiliated and weakened by being defeated in a war and by having so much territory taken away.  Mexicans who lived in the areas taken by the US typically found themselves losing wealth and status as they came to be seen as foreigners in their new land.

In these ways, Manifest Destiny affected different groups in different ways.

This question investigates the most extreme differences in the sizes of stars. Compute the ratio of the radii of a M supergiant star to that of a...

The temperature, radius, and luminosity of all stars (not just main sequence stars) are related by this equation:

`L/L_0 = (R/R_0)^2 (T/T_0)^4`

Where L_0, R_0, and T_0 are based on the Sun, which has a radius of 6.96*10^8 meters and a temperature of 5780 K.

From there, we can solve for R:

`R = R_0 sqrt{L/L_0 * (T_0/T)^4}`

Plug in the numbers for the supergiant:

`R = 6.96*10^8 sqrt{2*10^5 * (5780/3000)^4}`

`R = 1.2*10^12 m`

Similarly for the dwarf:
`R = 6.96*10^8 sqrt{10^3 * (15000/3000)^4}`
`R = 5.5*10^11 m`

Despite one being a "supergiant" and the other being a "dwarf", they are not that different in size, because these terms are actually about luminosity and temperature, not about size per se. (Also, they're both huge; the distance from the Sun to the Earth is about 1.5*10^11 meters, so both of these stars would engulf us if they were swapped out for the Sun.)

In the novel "To Kill A Mockingbird" what evidence from the novel shows where the gum and the pennies are coming from?

The fact that Nathan Radley fills the knothole in the tree with cement proves that the gum and pennies are from Boo Radley.

The first hint as to where the gum and pennies came from is the location of the tree.  The tree is on the Radley lot.

As we came to the live oaks at the Radley Place I raised my finger to point for the hundredth time to the knot-hole where I had found the chewing gum, trying to make Jem believe I had found it there, and found myself pointing at another piece of tinfoil. (Ch. 4)

The tree is easily accessible to Boo Radley, and he knows that the children will find what is left in it because they have to pass by. Boo has been watching them, and the presents in the tree are his way of reaching out to them.  He wants to make friends.  The gifts left in the tree make it clear that he is watching the children.  The soap dolls are a prime example.

You may be wondering if someone else in the Radley household could have left the objects in the tree.  This is highly unlikely.  We know this because of Nathan Radley’s reaction when he finds out that the children are getting the gifts.  He cements the tree’s knothole, so nothing else can be left there.

“Mr. Radley, ah—did you put cement in that hole in that tree down yonder?”

“Yes,” he said. “I filled it up.”

“Why’d you do it, sir?”

“Tree’s dying. You plug ‘em with cement when they’re sick. You ought to know that, Jem.” (Ch. 7)

Nathan Radley found out that Boo was leaving things in the tree for Scout and Jem to find, and he closed the hole.  This way, Boo could not leave anything else in the tree, and his connection and communication with the Finch children would be greatly inhibited.  Since Boo was a recluse, he had no other way to reach out to them.

The incident of the tree is an interesting one.  The children earlier proved interest in and empathy toward Boo Radley.  He was lonely, and decided to make friends.  His unusual way of doing it allowed the children to get to know him a little bit better.  Nathan put a stop to it because most people would think a grown man leaving gifts for children was inappropriate. 

How did the British anger the colonists after the French and Indian War?

There were several things the British did that angered the colonists after the French and Indian War. Immediately after the war ended, the British passed the Proclamation of 1763. The law prevented the colonists from moving west. The colonists were upset and said they would go to the west regardless of what the law said. The British then passed the Quartering Act that required the colonists to provide housing for British troops that were enforcing this law. The colonists didn’t want to have to pay for housing soldiers who were enforcing a law the colonists didn’t like or want.

There were some tax laws the colonists opposed. The Stamp Act was passed in 1765, and the Townshend Acts were passed in 1767. These laws were designed to have the colonists pay some of the cost of running the colonies. The colonists felt these tax laws were illegal because the colonists didn’t have representatives in Parliament that could speak about or vote on these taxes. Since all British citizens have the right of having representatives in Parliament who could vote on tax laws, the colonists felt these laws shouldn’t occur because they had no representatives in Parliament.

The Boston Massacre angered the colonists. When the British soldiers killed five colonists in March 1770, the people were very upset. They didn’t like the British soldiers, and this event intensified the dislike for them.

The colonists were upset with the Intolerable Acts that were passed after the Boston Tea Party. These laws were very harsh, especially on the colonists in Massachusetts. The colonists began to form militias, indicating they expected fighting to begin soon. After the battles at Lexington and Concord, most people believed the war would eventually begin. As a result of various actions that angered the colonists, the relationship between Great Britain and the colonies deteriorated between 1763-1776, leading to the Revolutionary War.

How are the seeds dispersed by animals protected?

Animals disperse seeds in two main ways - 1.) by eating the seeds and then shedding them in their droppings and 2.) physically carrying the seeds to other locations.

Seeds which are ingested need to be protected from damage by the animal's teeth and also from the harsh conditions of the digestive system. For this reason, seeds are usually very hard so that they can not be easily crushed between the teeth or so small that they can be swallowed whole (for example, raspberry seeds). Seeds also have a tough outer seed coat which is not penetrated by the stomach acids. Thus viable seeds can be passed through the digestive tract.

Some seeds are large and not particularly tasty (for example, a peach pit). This prevents the seed from being eaten along with the fruit in the first place. An animal can carry a fruit like this to a new location to eat it, and then just eat around or spit the pit out. 

The cashew is a particularly interesting plant. The cashew produces a 'cashew apple' and the cashew itself is attached to the bottom of this apple. The apple is very tasty and is food for humans and other animals. However, the cashew is the actual seed, and is encased in a hard shell which contains a chemical which is irritating to the skin. In this way, animals are enticed to collect and eat the apples, dispersing the seeds in the process, but are less likely to try to break open the seed itself.

What is Thomas Paine's overall message to the troops in the field in The Crisis?

The Crisis was a series of essays by Paine intended to, in short, rally the Continental troops who had suffered a series of defeats at the hands of the British. The army seemed likely to disintegrate through both expired enlistments and desertions, not to mention the ever-present possibility that they would be destroyed by the British Army. Philadelphia had been captured, and the future of George Washington as commander of the Continental Army seemed in doubt. Paine argued that the British army was nowhere near as strong as people believed, and that the privations and hardships suffered by the Continental Army were worth it when considering the ultimate prize of liberty:

Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. 

The Crisis consisted of several essays, but the first, written in the winter of 1776, is the most famous. It was in this piece that he laid out the basic themes of the rest. He accused Tories of cowardice, argued that the British government, like all monarchies, was thoroughly corrupt, and continued to paint the conflict as a contest between good and evil in which the Americans would inevitably prevail, if only they would persist in the struggle.

What is a summary of Diary Two from The Freedom Writers Diary?

Interesting question! In Diary Two of The Freedom Writers Diary, several interesting components are revealed through the author.

In this section, the author reveals that he does not feel as though he belongs in the classroom. The author illustrates that he is the only white student in the classroom. The author believes that he belongs in the other classroom with the mainly white “distinguished scholars.” As the author reveals:

“I feel really uncomfortable in here with all these rejects.”

Not only this, but he also discusses that mixing all the races in this classroom is problematic. As the author demonstrates, during lunch, all of the students segregate based on their race. He believes that this is acceptable and that the school will regret mixing up the races and putting them into the same classroom.

Thus, the author does not feel as though he belongs. Subsequently, the author also believes that the school is making a mistake for mixing the students from different races together in this classroom. Consequently, despite that he should be in this classroom (due to his academic struggles in English), the author wants to be placed in another class.  

What do Johnny and Ponyboy do when they know the children are in the church? Are they scared?

The chapter that you are asking about is chapter 6.  Ponyboy and Johnny see the church burning, and they think that one of their cigarettes must have started the fire.  The two boys quickly realize that there are kids all around the building, and they can hear kids screaming from within the church as well.  

Then we all froze. Faintly, just faintly, you could hear someone yelling. And it sounded like it was coming from inside the church.

Johnny and Ponyboy do not hesitate.  The fling themselves headlong at the church.  They break through a window and climb through in order to find and rescue any children inside the church.  The two boys quickly locate the children and begin hustling them out of the church.  

No, Ponyboy and Johnny are not scared.  Physiologically, their adrenaline is on overdrive.  They know that they have to act quickly, or the kids will die.  Johnny and Ponyboy simply do not have time to be scared.  What's interesting about the text is that Ponyboy recalls thinking about the danger he is in and wondering why he is not scared.  

I should be scared, I thought with an odd detached feeling, but I'm not. The cinders and embers began falling on us, stinging and smarting like ants. Suddenly, in the red glow and the haze, I remembered wondering what it was like in a burning ember, and I thought: Now I know, it's a red hell. Why aren't I scared?

A poor figure! Shame on you! The Serbs have Austrian officers who are just as clever as the Russians; but we have beaten them in every battle for...

At the beginning of the play, Raina's  conversation with her mother, Catherine Petkoff, alludes to the Serbo-Bulgarian war of 1885. In Act 1, we learn that Raina is engaged to a Bulgarian officer, Sergius Saranoff.

While Catherine is in ecstasies regarding Saranoff's heroic cavalry charge, Raina initially expresses some doubt about her fiance's valor. She thinks that reading too much Byron and Pushkin has colored her perception of soldiering.

Only think, mother, I doubted him: I wondered whether all his heroic qualities and his soldiership might not prove mere imagination when he went into a real battle...

Because the operas and literature she is so fond of promote military valor in such romantic terms, Raina is afraid to trust that fiction can hold up to reality. Catherine asserts that Raina should be ashamed of herself for doubting Sergius, because their soldiers have already proven themselves on the battlefield. She thinks that Raina should not doubt the efficacy or valor of Russian/Bulgarian troops, as they have defeated the Serbians in every battle, despite the presence of clever officers on the Serbian side.

In other words, Catherine is telling Raina that she should have more faith in the evidence before her eyes rather than her fears.