You throw a stone straight upward with initial speed 15 m/s. If you want to throw a second stone straight upward with speed 20 m/s and have it...

In order to answer this question, let's first analyze the motion of the stone with the initial speed of 15 m/s, the first stone.

The time it will take the stone to reach the peak (the highest point) of its motion is determined by the equation

`v_f = v_0-g*t`

 ` ` , where `v_f = 0`  ` ` because at the highest point the velocity of the ball is zero, and g is the gravitational...

In order to answer this question, let's first analyze the motion of the stone with the initial speed of 15 m/s, the first stone.

The time it will take the stone to reach the peak (the highest point) of its motion is determined by the equation

`v_f = v_0-g*t`

 ` ` , where `v_f = 0`  ` ` because at the highest point the velocity of the ball is zero, and g is the gravitational acceleration, 9.8 m/s^2.

The time it takes the first stone to reach the peak is `t=15/9.8 = 1.53 s`  ` `

The maximum height of the first stone can be found from this equation of motion:

`v_f^2 - v_0^2 = -2gh`

From here, the height is `h = (v_0^2)/(2g) = 15^2/(2*9.8) = 11.5 m` .

The second stone has to hit the first stone at the moment when the first stone is at its maximum height. This means, the second stone's motion has to be such that at t = 1.53 seconds after the first stone was thrown, the second's stone's height has to be 11.5 meters.

Let's find how long it will take the second stone, with initial velocity 20 m/s, to reach 11.5 meters:

`h = v_0t - g*t^2/2`

`11.5 = 20*t - 9.8*t^2/2`

`4.9t^2 - 20t + 11.5 = 0`

Use the quadratic formula to solve this quadratic equation:

`t = (20+-sqrt(20^2 - 4*4.9*11.5))/(2*4.9)`

`t = 3.39 ` s and `t = 0.69` s.

The second stone will reach the height of 11.5 meters twice: at t = 0.69 s, on its way up, and at t = 3.39 s, on its way down.

Since it take the first stone 1.53 second to reach the same height, there are two ways to throw the second stone, so it will hit the first stone when it is at this height:

the time 1.53 - 0.69 = 0.84 seconds AFTER the first stone was thrown

or

the time 3.39 - 1.53 = 1.86 seconds BEFORE the first stone was thrown.

Does radiation affect plant growth?

Radiation is energy that travels through and is transferred by waves. Non-ionizing radiation and ionizing radiation are two types of radiations. Non-ionizing radiation has less energy and, therefore, is not as harmful to living cells. Ionizing radiation has higher energy and is, therefore, more harmful to living cells. Ionizing radiation can break chemical bonds. If the energy of ionizing radiation is high enough, it can destroy the nucleus of atoms, which can have a direct...

Radiation is energy that travels through and is transferred by waves. Non-ionizing radiation and ionizing radiation are two types of radiations. Non-ionizing radiation has less energy and, therefore, is not as harmful to living cells. Ionizing radiation has higher energy and is, therefore, more harmful to living cells. Ionizing radiation can break chemical bonds. If the energy of ionizing radiation is high enough, it can destroy the nucleus of atoms, which can have a direct impact on an organism’s DNA.

Below is a list of how radiation can affect plants specifically:

·         Changes in chromosomal and DNA structure, causing mutations such as inverted or deleted nucleotide sequences

·         Decreased plant growth

·         Decreased seed germination

·         Reduced reproduction rate

·         Abnormalities in the offspring of parent plants that are exposed to the radiation

·         Decreased life span

What are some metaphors in Act 1 of Julius Caesar?

Shakespeare's Julius Caesar is about the political intrigue surrounding the assassination of the Roman dictator in 44 B.C. The main characters include Caesar, his ally Marc Antony and the main plotters against Caesar, Brutus and Cassius. Shakespeare, of course, is the master of figurative language and Julius Caesar has several metaphors. Here are five examples from Act I.

In Act I, Scene 1, the tribune Marellus compares the men who have come to worship Caesar to...

Shakespeare's Julius Caesar is about the political intrigue surrounding the assassination of the Roman dictator in 44 B.C. The main characters include Caesar, his ally Marc Antony and the main plotters against Caesar, Brutus and Cassius. Shakespeare, of course, is the master of figurative language and Julius Caesar has several metaphors. Here are five examples from Act I.

In Act I, Scene 1, the tribune Marellus compares the men who have come to worship Caesar to blocks and stones, because they are as unthinking as those objects: "You blocks, you stones, you worse than senseless things". Marellus and Flavius are against Caesar because he has recently defeated Pompey, and they were supporters of that Roman leader. 

Later in Scene 1, Flavius compares Caesar to a bird who would "soar above" the masses and take away their freedoms. He says that bird must be "plucked":

These growing feathers plucked from Caesar’s wing

Will make him fly an ordinary pitch,

Who else would soar above the view of men

And keep us all in servile fearfulness.

Many Romans were afraid that Caesar would bring an end to the Republic and that he would prove to be a ruthless dictator.

In Scene 2, the conspirator Cassius attempts to convince Brutus that Caesar has grown too powerful. Because Brutus is well respected in Rome, Cassius believes he is the best man to lead a rebellion. Cassius compares Caesar to a carnivorous predator feeding on the meat of power:

Upon what meat doth this our Caesar feed

That he is grown so great?

A little later in Scene 2 Caesar, understanding that Cassius may be against him, compares the man to a hungry wolf. Caesar prefers those who are less ambitious:

Let me have men about me that are fat,

Sleek-headed men and such as sleep a-nights.

Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look.

He thinks too much. Such men are dangerous.

Finally, when Casca explains to Brutus and Cassius that Caesar has epilepsy, or the "falling sickness" Cassius denies it, but admits that he and the other conspirators will have it because they will fall from power:

No, Caesar hath it not. But you and I

And honest Casca, we have the falling sickness.

How can the reader complete an ending for the story "The Lady, or the Tiger?"

Indubitably, an original story, "The Lady of the Tiger" presents the reader with an uncertainly that entertains, while at the same time it confounds.

In writing an ending for this tale of semi-barbaric and passionate love, the reader must decide where the balance of the two will tilt. The young man, who must choose a door which will decide his fate, is aware that the princess will have learned which doors hold the young maiden...

Indubitably, an original story, "The Lady of the Tiger" presents the reader with an uncertainly that entertains, while at the same time it confounds.

In writing an ending for this tale of semi-barbaric and passionate love, the reader must decide where the balance of the two will tilt. The young man, who must choose a door which will decide his fate, is aware that the princess will have learned which doors hold the young maiden and the tiger. So, he looks up at her and she points to the right; trusting her, he goes directly to the right and opens this door.

Is he correct in trusting her? This is what the reader must decide. In making this decision, the reader needs to consider the motivation the princess has in pointing to the right. Does she want her lover to live with the maiden, or to die? Either way, she will never again be with him. So, if he dies, she does not lose her lover since he is already lost in death. If he marries the maiden, the princess also loses him but the lose is while he lives happily with this maiden. Does she want the young man's happiness? Is this consistent with her nature? Probably not.

It seems, then, that the princess, who is semi-barbaric in nature, would rather that the lover be killed and eliminated from court than to be granted marriage to the maiden only to remind the princess of what she has lost.

Explain the elephant as a symbol of British Empire in "Shooting an Elephant" by George Orwell.

The most obvious symbol of empire in "Shooting an Elephant" is the narrator himself, as he is the actual representative of the British Empire in Burma. One could argue, certainly, that the elephant represents the Empire in the 1930s as well. The elephant rampaged through the bazaar, destroying everything in its path, accidentally trampling and killing a coolie in the process. Clearly there are parallels between the destruction wrought by the elephant and that of...

The most obvious symbol of empire in "Shooting an Elephant" is the narrator himself, as he is the actual representative of the British Empire in Burma. One could argue, certainly, that the elephant represents the Empire in the 1930s as well. The elephant rampaged through the bazaar, destroying everything in its path, accidentally trampling and killing a coolie in the process. Clearly there are parallels between the destruction wrought by the elephant and that of the British Empire. However, after Orwell shoots the elephant (under pressure from the angry crowd) he is left to watch as the mighty creature slowly and agonizingly dies. An "enormous senility" came over the elephant, Orwell says. "One could have imagined him thousands of years old". As the narrator describes pouring shot after shot into him to end the ordeal, it is not difficult to imagine that Orwell intends the reader to think of the British Empire, a bloated, dying beast in its own right, waiting, like the elephant, to be torn apart by native peoples that it had terrorized.

On what page do Scout and Francis fight in To Kill a Mockingbird?

In the Warner Books publication, the pages are 88–90 for this incident. The passage is in Chapter 9 of To Kill a Mockingbird.

Scout's cousin Francis is not a relative of whom she is very fond. Scout finds it difficult to agree with Francis on several topics, one of which is Dill. Francis ridicules Dill, referring to him as "a little runt" who is merely passed back and forth from one relative to another in the summer....

In the Warner Books publication, the pages are 88–90 for this incident. The passage is in Chapter 9 of To Kill a Mockingbird.

Scout's cousin Francis is not a relative of whom she is very fond. Scout finds it difficult to agree with Francis on several topics, one of which is Dill. Francis ridicules Dill, referring to him as "a little runt" who is merely passed back and forth from one relative to another in the summer. When Scout disagrees, Francis assumes a superior attitude and tells Scout,

"You're mighty dumb sometimes, Jean-Louise. Guess you don't know any better, though."

Scout detects the arrogance in the words and asks him what he means. He responds,

"If Uncle Atticus lets you run around with stray dogs, that's his own business, like Grandma says, so it ain't your fault. I guess it ain't your fault if Uncle Atticus is a n****r-lover besides, but I'm here to tell you it certainly does mortify the rest of the family--"

An instantly incensed Scout challenges him to clarify his statement. Francis says, "He's ruinin' the family, that what he's doin'." He rises and gets a safe distance before he shouts that Atticus "is nothin' but a n****r-lover!" 
Now it is an extremely belligerent Scout who leaps from the steps and races down the catwalk where Francis has gone. She grabs him and demands that he take back his insult. Francis refuses and jerks himself loose. Racing into the old kitchen, he yells back at Scout, repeating his invective.

This time she connects with her fist and splits the skin of her knuckles on his front teeth. Then she swings with her right fist, but Uncle Jack grabs her arms before she can connect with her punch. When he scolds her, Scout complains that he is not being fair because he does not know what Francis has called Atticus.

Later, Uncle Jack comes to the Finch home and talks with Scout; after hearing her side, he promises to have a talk with his sister Alexandra about the behavior of Francis, and he adds, "Wait'll I get my hands on that boy...." But Scout begs her uncle to not say anything about Francis's name-calling. He promises, restoring his and Scout's amicable relationship again.

Please provide a quote from Harper Lee's To Kill A Mockingbird that shows how Jem is innocent after he gets beat up by Mr. Ewell?

It's too bad that Arthur Radley does not talk because it would have been very interesting to hear exactly how he saved Jem and Scout from the clutches of evil Bob Ewell. However, Scout's limited view of the scene due to her ham costume certainly add suspense and mystery to the telling of it. With Jem laid up with a broken elbow, and asleep with the help from the doctor, Sheriff Heck Tate had to...

It's too bad that Arthur Radley does not talk because it would have been very interesting to hear exactly how he saved Jem and Scout from the clutches of evil Bob Ewell. However, Scout's limited view of the scene due to her ham costume certainly add suspense and mystery to the telling of it. With Jem laid up with a broken elbow, and asleep with the help from the doctor, Sheriff Heck Tate had to decide what happened based on evidence from the scene and Scout's recollections. Ironically, it's Jem's own father, Atticus, who concludes that Jem must have stabbed Bob Ewell in defense of his sister. Luckily, the Sheriff considers things differently as follows:

"'You hear what Scout said, there's not doubt about it. She said Jem got up and yanked him off her--he probably got hold of Ewell's knife somehow in the dark. . . we'll find out tomorrow.'

'Mis-ter Finch, hold on,' said Mr. Tate. 'Jem never stabbed Bob Ewell'" (272).

The discussion goes on, but the decision to prosecute comes down to Sheriff Tate's decision on the matter. Granted, Tate goes further to change the crime scene's narrative to safe-guard Boo Radley, but either way, Jem is innocent. Sheriff Tate solidifies his decision by saying the following:

"For once, if you don't see it my way, there's not much you can do about it. If you wanta try I'll call you a liar to your face. Your boy never stabbed Bob Ewell. . . didn't come near a mile of it and now you know it. All he wanted to do was get him and his sister safely home" (275).

Is the construction of the RMS Titanic a good representation of the Industrial Age?

It is not a giant leap to consider the Titanic a mammoth metaphor of the Industrial Age. The Titanic was a massive ship, the likes of which were not even imagined fifty years earlier. It seems to represent the entrepreneurial spirit of thinking big and the idea that no dream was too grand. The production of the ship required a vast sum of natural resources and the use of thousands of laborers. The construction of...

It is not a giant leap to consider the Titanic a mammoth metaphor of the Industrial Age. The Titanic was a massive ship, the likes of which were not even imagined fifty years earlier. It seems to represent the entrepreneurial spirit of thinking big and the idea that no dream was too grand. The production of the ship required a vast sum of natural resources and the use of thousands of laborers. The construction of the ship itself was a trophy to industrialism. The hyperbole of the descriptions of the vessel, like "unsinkable" and "feat of engineering" are almost humorous to think about today.

The Titanic is also representative of the class struggles that existed between the industrialists and the workers in the factories. The average cost of a first class ticket was $50,000 when inflation is taken into consideration. Only the wealthiest capitalists could afford that expense. The first class passengers had access to whatever amenities existed on the voyage. The lower class passengers did not have access to these accommodations and were not even allowed on many parts of the ship.

Symbolically, the iceberg and disaster that befell the Titanic demonstrate the limits of industrialism. In the same way that workers revolted and demanded labor rights, the North Atlantic demanded an end to the crowning achievement of industrialism that was the Titanic.

What is the theme of the story "The Interlopers" by Saki?

In the story The Interlopers, the main theme would be the enmity between Ulrich and Georg, which causes the two men to feud over the small stretch of forest land and become bitter enemies in the process. The beginning of the story is spent explaining how this dispute began, with each man's grandfather fighting over it, until the wealthy landowner Ulrich claims that the land is legally his despite the claims of Georg to the...

In the story The Interlopers, the main theme would be the enmity between Ulrich and Georg, which causes the two men to feud over the small stretch of forest land and become bitter enemies in the process. The beginning of the story is spent explaining how this dispute began, with each man's grandfather fighting over it, until the wealthy landowner Ulrich claims that the land is legally his despite the claims of Georg to the contrary. The latter continues to hunt on the land and this makes Ulrich mad enough to devise a plan to destroy him. So the two men set out on this fateful night to confront each other and end their bitter feud once and for all. Both men, due to their enmity, see the other as the interloper.

There is also a secondary theme that the author introduces which causes the surprise at the end of the story and also introduces the element of irony. Although the men claim legal and/or hunting rights to the land, the idea or theme of nature vs. man comes into play when both men, having been felled and made captive by a giant tree, discover that they are not alone in the forest nor are they in the position to defend their claims or themselves from becoming prey to the natural owners of this piece of wilderness. Despite the fact that Ulrich and Georg had finally decided to disavow their enmity and become friends after all, in the end they will realize that they have made a fatal mistake in thinking that either of them could "own" this stretch of forest land. The wolves, the true and natural owners of the wilderness, have arrived.

Who is or are the actual policy maker(s) of organizations?

The actual policy maker(s) of organizations, indirectly, are the individuals and groups it seeks to serve. Any policies have to made with these end users in mind. If not, these policies will be somewhat faulty or non-producing because they will not address their issues and concerns. Therefore, these end users of products and/or services dictate the corporate policies of organizations.

Now, directly, the actual policy makers of organizations are the management individuals and teams...

The actual policy maker(s) of organizations, indirectly, are the individuals and groups it seeks to serve. Any policies have to made with these end users in mind. If not, these policies will be somewhat faulty or non-producing because they will not address their issues and concerns. Therefore, these end users of products and/or services dictate the corporate policies of organizations.

Now, directly, the actual policy makers of organizations are the management individuals and teams that a company employs. This consists of Presidents, Chief Executive Officers, Chief Financial Officers, Chief Operating Officers, Human Resource Managers, mid-level managers, and Boards of Directors that various companies employ. Working and meeting together, these employees design various corporate policies, with higher management typically having the final say.

These direct policy makers study data that an organization captures to help them make informed decisions that result in a particular policy or group of policies. Consider, though, that this data is often gleaned from information provided by an entities end users, the above-mentioned individuals and groups that comprise a business’s customer base. So, again, you see here the influence of end users and why I believe they are the actual policy makers when you really study how an organization really sets its policies.

Consider a company like Whole Foods Market, a purveyor of high-quality natural, organic, and other products. One of the Company’s major policies is to provide its target market with top-notch products, at convenient locations in major markets. It has a policy of providing its customers fresh and innovative ready-to-serve meals from its prepared food counters, along with offerings from its other premium quality departments, such as its in-store bakeries.

Is this a policy they made up on a whim? No. It is a policy developed by way of market research that conveyed to the Company that this is what its customers wanted and continue to demand. So, we have this particular Whole Foods Market policy, but the instigator and, in essence, maker of this policy is the firm’s end users – the customers that spend the money in their retail food stores and provide Whole Foods Market its revenues and profits and finances that result in dividends paid to its shareholders’.

In The Great Gatsby, how do Nick and Tom differ from one another?

Firstly, in terms of Nick's description, he comes from a prominent, well-to-do family from the Midwest, which implies that they were middle class. His father ran a wholesale hardware business which was founded by his grandfather's brother. Tom, on the other hand came from an enormously wealthy family, so much so, that "even in college his freedom with money was a matter of reproach."

Furthermore, Nick seems to have been quite bookish and academic at college, the same one Tom attended. He mentioned that he "was rather literary in college." There is no mention of his participation in any sport, whilst Tom in contrast, "had been one of the most powerful ends that ever played football at New Haven" and was some sort of national figure in a way. Nick had also come to the East to find work, more particularly, "to learn the bond business," whilst Tom evidently, because of his family's wealth, did not have to work at all. He instead, traveled at whim, with no particular reason to do so.

Another clear difference between the two characters seems to lie in their intelligence. Tom tends to easily believe what he reads as the truth, without making any informed decisions, which makes him appear gullible. This is displayed in his referencing of books which are obviously based on stereotypical and prejudiced notions, whilst Nick seems to be more circumspect. This also indicates that Tom himself is quite prejudiced towards those of another racial disposition since he makes obnoxious remarks in this regard. Nick, on the other hand, does not come across as so severely judgmental.

This does not mean to say that Nick is completely objective though, because he does pass judgment on a number of characters, such as those who attend Gatsby's parties, Tom and Daisy, the characters who attend Tom's get-togethers, including Myrtle Wilson and even Gatsby himself, whom he clearly favors above everyone else. He states, for example, that Jay is 'worth the whole damn bunch put together' and that 'they're a rotten crowd'.

In terms of character, it seems that Nick is more morally upright than Tom. Tom indulges in seedy extra-marital affairs and seems to be not much concerned about what he does. He is hardly ever apologetic and seems to feel no guilt for what he does because he continuously indulges in these secretive tete-a-tetes. Added to this, he is also a hypocrite stating: 'Nowadays people begin by sneering at family life and family institutions, and next they’ll throw everything overboard and have intermarriage between black and white', whilst he is involved in an extra-marital affair. The last part of his remark also displays his bigotry. Nick, in opposition, shows some moral conscience when firstly, he rejects Gatsby's offer of a job for reward in having agreed to arrange a meeting between Jay and Daisy.

Nick also expresses some guilt in having ended an affair with a previous girlfriend and even about breaking up with Jordan Baker, which he found "awkward and unpleasant." He is also the one of only two Jay's 'friends' who attend his funeral, the other being the man with the owl eye glasses. It can, however, be said that in indulging and assisting Jay by arranging a meeting between him and Daisy, Nick is complicit in their adultery. He also remains silent about the affair, which indicates that in this regard, he lacks moral responsibility.

Nick also displays greater humility than Tom could ever hope to have. Tom comes across as boorish and arrogant - a man made supercilious by his wealth, whereas Nick does not seem to display a similar characteristic.

One can also mention one other minor disparity between the two men. Nick had done military service and fought in the First World War, whilst there is no reference about Tom having done the same. In the end, it is this polarity between the two which informs Nick's great dislike for Tom. In their final encounter, he makes this pertinently clear: 

“What’s the matter, Nick? Do you object to shaking hands with me?”

“Yes. You know what I think of you.”

What happened in chapter 15 of the book Lyddie?

Chapter 15 is a depressing chapter to read.  There's practically nothing happy that happens.  Even things that first appear good on the surface wind up being a blow to Lyddie.  

The chapter begins with Lyddie's uncle coming to see Lyddie.  Uncle Judah has even brought Lyddie's sister Rachel with him.  That sounds wonderful, except that the reason for his visit is not a happy reason.  Uncle Judah has come to tell Lyddie that he...

Chapter 15 is a depressing chapter to read.  There's practically nothing happy that happens.  Even things that first appear good on the surface wind up being a blow to Lyddie.  

The chapter begins with Lyddie's uncle coming to see Lyddie.  Uncle Judah has even brought Lyddie's sister Rachel with him.  That sounds wonderful, except that the reason for his visit is not a happy reason.  Uncle Judah has come to tell Lyddie that he and his wife had to put Lyddie's mother into an asylum.  In order to pay for such a thing, they plan to sell Lyddie's family farm.  Rachel is there, because they can no longer care for her and are basically leaving Lyddie with having to raise Rachel.  

Lyddie is forced to beg Mrs. Bedlow to allow Rachel to stay for a couple of weeks.  Mrs. Bedlow agrees.  Then Lyddie tries to contact Charlie, so that he can stop the sale of the farm.  

Lyddie's work life isn't much better.  Brigid is continuing to slow down at work, which frustrates Lyddie to no end.  Marsden threatens to fire Brigid, which Lyddie actually doesn't want to happen, so Lyddie begins helping Brigid even more.  

What do we learn from witnessing the downfall of Hamlet by William Shakespeare?

The ending of Hamletseems intended to show that procrastination can lead to disaster. Hamlet's indecisiveness has resulted in the deaths of many innocent people. They are Polonius, Ophelia, Laertes, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, and Gertrude. We may not feel especially sorry for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, but they did not seem to deserve such cruel and unexpected fates. We feel most sorry for poor, sweet, innocent Ophelia. Horatio almost dies himself when he tries to commit suicide....

The ending of Hamlet seems intended to show that procrastination can lead to disaster. Hamlet's indecisiveness has resulted in the deaths of many innocent people. They are Polonius, Ophelia, Laertes, Rosencrantz, Guildenstern, and Gertrude. We may not feel especially sorry for Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, but they did not seem to deserve such cruel and unexpected fates. We feel most sorry for poor, sweet, innocent Ophelia. Horatio almost dies himself when he tries to commit suicide. Hamlet is another victim of his own procrastination. He should have been able to take his revenge against King Claudius without creating such chaos. With his intelligence, and with all his scheming, He should have been able to figure out a plan whereby he could have assassinated Claudius and become king himself, in which case he might have married Ophelia. Laertes shows the audience how Hamlet should have acted when he storms into Claudius' throne-room spontaneously.

GENTLEMAN:Save yourself, my lord.
The ocean, overpeering of his list,
Eats not the flats with more impetuous haste
Than young Laertes, in a riotous head,
O'erbears your offices. The rabble call him lord;
And, as the world were now but to begin,
Antiquity forgot, custom not known—
The ratifiers and props of every word—
They cry 'Choose we! Laertes shall be king!'

It would have been even easier for Hamlet to lead a mob against the King than for Laertes to do so, because we are told that Hamlet is extremely popular with the people, and he has a clear title to the throne, either as his father's successor or as Claudius' publicly appointed successor. 

What is the meaning of lines 1-10 of Pope's The Rape of the Lock?

The Rape of the Lock by Alexander Pope is a mock-epic poem, composed and published anonymously in 1712 and revised and republished under Pope's own name in 1714. A third version was published in 1717. It is based on an actual incident in which Lord Petre (the Baron in the poem) cut off a lock of Arabella Fermor’s (Belinda in the poem) hair.

The poem as a whole, including the first 10 lines, is written in...

The Rape of the Lock by Alexander Pope is a mock-epic poem, composed and published anonymously in 1712 and revised and republished under Pope's own name in 1714. A third version was published in 1717. It is based on an actual incident in which Lord Petre (the Baron in the poem) cut off a lock of Arabella Fermor’s (Belinda in the poem) hair.

The poem as a whole, including the first 10 lines, is written in heroic couplets, i.e. iambic pentameter lines rhymed AA BB CC, etc. the metrical and rhyme scheme are both fairly regular, with limited use of substitutions and elision.

As a mock epic, The Rape of the Lock follows many epic conventions but in a humorous manner. The first six couplets or 12 lines take the form of an invocation to the Muses, which was the typical opening of actual ancient epic such as that of Virgil or Homer. The poet sets out the themes of the story, the motives of the Baron in stealing the lock and Belinda in rejecting the Baron's attempts to seduce her, and asks the Muse for help in searching for answers. The opening two lines, which emphasize the triviality of the subject, cue the reader from the start that this is a mock, not serious, epic on the theme of love

What dire Offence from am'rous Causes springs,

What mighty Contests rise from trivial Things ...

As you work on your assignment, you should emphasize the elements of humor and satire in the lines, showing how they make fun of both the triviality of the aristocrats portrayed and the pomposity of much epic writing. 

How is the evil in To Kill A Mockingbird motivated by ignorance and prejudice?

Harper Lee does a wonderful job demonstrating that through ignorance and prejudice, evil can be a long-lasting result that plagues generations. Human nature tends to jump to conclusions first and ask questions later. Sometimes people don't even ask questions later, they simply jump to conclusions and spread false information to neighbors through gossip or down to their children who blindly believe their parents. Once the evil is passed down from one generation to another, it is very difficult to root it out. Stephanie Crawford, local children mimicking parents, and Mr. Ewell are a few examples of how evil is spread through ignorance and prejudice.

Stephanie Crawford - The Gossip - She is ignorant because she doesn't gather all of the facts first before spreading information to children like Jem. She tells Jem what happened to Boo Radley in his past, but she also doesn't teach him to be kind to others who are different. Rather, she goes and tells a fantastic tale about Boo looking in her window at night. This creates more prejudice and fear that eventually demonizes the poor man. 

"So Jem received most of his information from Miss Stephanie Crawford, a neighborhood scold, who said she knew the whole thing" (11).

Stephanie only tells stories to make herself look important to others--that's her ignorant motivation. People like that shouldn't be taken honestly for their word because she sure helps to spread the ignorance.

The Children - Jem Finch, Cecil Jacobs and Cousin Francis are both good examples of children who listen to the ignorance and prejudice they hear at home (or in the neighborhood), believe them, and then go spread the same around. Jem spreads the Boo Radley ghost stories (11-12), Cecil tells everyone at school that Scout's dad "defends" N--s (74-75), and Francis tells her that Atticus is a "N-- lover" (83). Incidents like these just perpetuate the problems we see in society. Luckily, Atticus, Maudie, and others do their best to teach and lead by example so that some of the ignorance and prejudice can be stopped.

Bob Ewell - This man represents evil in many forms because his laziness, ignorance, and prejudice rule his life. Everything this man does is selfish and self-serving. He spreads ignorance by not having his children get a good education, by teaching them that whites are better than blacks, by teaching them that lying is alright, and that hurting other people is fine if they've hurt your pride. Notice that Atticus never calls Bob his friend like he does Walter Cunningham. There's just something twisted about Bob. It's as if his poverty, lack of education and trashy status in the community are also consequences fueled by his ignorance and prejudice; and, he is a product of generations of Southern philosophy in many ways. Even after Bob spits in Atticus's face, Atticus still finds a way to understand him by saying the following:

"Jem, see if you can stand in Bob Ewell's shoes a minute. I destroyed his last shred of credibility at that trial, if he had any to begin with. The man had to have some kind of comeback, his kind always does. So if spitting in my face and threatening me saved Mayella Ewell one extra beating, that's something I'll gladly take. He had to take it out on somebody and I'd rather it be me than that houseful of children out there" (218).

Thus, ignorance and prejudice seem to motivate bad behavior in people, which perpetuates more ignorance and prejudice. It's a vicious cycle that hopefully ends with good people like Atticus, Miss Maudie, and others like them standing up for what is right.

What are some examples of death imagery in "The Scarlet Ibis"?

There are several examples of death imagery in James Hurst's short story "The Scarlet Ibis" about two brothers growing up in North Carolina in the first part of the 20th century. The very first paragraph is full of words which suggest death, including "dead," "rotting," "untenanted," "empty," and "graveyard." The narrator is telling this story from many years after the events and so he knows how the story will turn out. He knows that his brother...

There are several examples of death imagery in James Hurst's short story "The Scarlet Ibis" about two brothers growing up in North Carolina in the first part of the 20th century. The very first paragraph is full of words which suggest death, including "dead," "rotting," "untenanted," "empty," and "graveyard." The narrator is telling this story from many years after the events and so he knows how the story will turn out. He knows that his brother Doodle will die at a very young age. 

Throughout the story there are references and images of death. From the beginning the family thought Doodle would die and the narrator says,

Daddy had Mr. Heath, the carpenter, build a little mahogany coffin for him. 

The narrator admits that he was sometimes cruel to Doodle because his brother was disabled and even shows Doodle the coffin in the barn:

One day I took him up to the barn loft and showed him his casket, telling him how we all had believed he would die. It was covered with a film of Paris green sprinkled to kill the rats, and screech owls had built a nest inside it.

Death is mentioned again when the boys' mother talks about World War I:

And during that summer, strange names were heard through the house: Chateau-Thierry, Amiens, Soissons, and in her blessing at the supper table, Mama once said, "And bless the Pearsons, whose boy Joe was lost at Belleau Wood."

The war is mentioned because, in many ways, the two brothers are at war with each other as the narrator pushes Doodle to do things he is not physically capable of doing.

Hurst uses more death imagery when the ibis arrives in the family's yard. The bird has been blown off course by tumultuous weather (another symbol for the boys' relationship) and landed in the "bleeding tree." Hurst describes the death of the bird:

Its long, graceful neck jerked twice into an S, then straightened out, and the bird was still. A white veil came over the eyes and the long white beak unhinged. Its legs were crossed and its clawlike feet were delicately curved at rest. Even death did not mar its grace, for it lay on the earth like a broken vase of red flowers, and we stood around it, awed by its exotic beauty.

When Doodle dies at the end of the story, Hurst uses imagery quite similar to the description he used when describing the death of the ibis:

He lay very awkwardly, with his head thrown far back, making his vermilion neck appear unusually long and slim. His little legs, bent sharply at the knees, had never before seemed so fragile, so thin. 

Just as the bird died under the "bleeding tree," Doodle dies under a "nightshade bush." The ibis, of course, is meant to be a symbol for Doodle.

What did Atticus tell Tom after the trial in To Kill a Mockingbird?

The trial ends in Ch. 21 and towards the end of the chapter it says Atticus went to Tom Robinson and

"whispered something to him. He put his hand on his shoulder and whispered something to him" (Ch.21).

We are not told what Atticus whispers to Tom. In Ch. 22 we know that Atticus plans to appeal, so it is possible that this is what he whispered to Tom, but we cannot know for sure....

The trial ends in Ch. 21 and towards the end of the chapter it says Atticus went to Tom Robinson and

"whispered something to him. He put his hand on his shoulder and whispered something to him" (Ch.21).

We are not told what Atticus whispers to Tom. In Ch. 22 we know that Atticus plans to appeal, so it is possible that this is what he whispered to Tom, but we cannot know for sure. It is also not uncommon for a defense attorney, with an unfavorable outcome at hand, to offer his condolences to the defendant. Atticus might have been saying something along the lines of "I'm sorry about the outcome, but we'll keep fighting..." which would be typical in real-life and fit with what we know in the next chapter.

How does author Harper Lee slowly build a web of tension leading up to the trial in To Kill a Mockingbird?

The word tension, as a literary term, can be defined as the "dramatic or even melodramatic elements of plot, setting, or character" that move a story towards its climax (University of Richmond Writing Center, Writer's Web: First Drafts, "Tension"). By "melodramatic," we mean excessively dramatic. Such dramatic and melodramatic elementsserve to intensify the action, the uncertainty of the outcome of events, and even the emotions of the audience. Author Harper Lee...

The word tension, as a literary term, can be defined as the "dramatic or even melodramatic elements of plot, setting, or character" that move a story towards its climax (University of Richmond Writing Center, Writer's Web: First Drafts, "Tension"). By "melodramatic," we mean excessively dramatic. Such dramatic and melodramatic elements serve to intensify the action, the uncertainty of the outcome of events, and even the emotions of the audience. Author Harper Lee uses many narrative elements to create a web of tension leading up to Tom Robinson's trial, and some of those elements are specific events.

Author Lee first creates a web of tension by weaving into the story the mystery surrounding the Finch's neighbor Arthur (Boo) Radley. Arthur Radley behaves contrary to society by never leaving his house, and his contrary behavior has led to the development of many rumors and myths about him, aimed at trying to explain his behavior. The neighborhood children have become so terrified by these rumors and myths that they believe him to be a dangerous but also curious person. As the children try to assuage their curiosity by trying to find out what he looks like, they put themselves in situations in which they feel they must run for their lives, which leaves the reader feeling tense.

Aside from the mystery surrounding Arthur Radley, tension begins to be built once Atticus accepts the role of Tom Robinson's defense lawyer, and the children begin being subjected to ridicule from the people of the town. One of the tensest moments is when Mrs. Dubose insults the children by saying, "Your father's no better than the niggers and trash he works for!," a comment that infuriates Jem to the point that he destroys Mrs. Dubose's garden of camellia bushes (Ch. 11).

The moment of greatest tension prior to the trial is when Atticus is approached by mobs, first one led by Sheriff Heck Tate in front of the Finches' house and the second led by Walter Cunningham Sr. in front of the jail. Though Atticus tells Jem the first mob was made up of nothing more than a group of their friends, it is very clear that the mob's members disapprove of Atticus's determination to defend Robinson, as they move in on him in anger the moment he asserts, "[Robinson's] not going [to the chair] till the truth's told ... And you know what the truth is" (Ch. 15). The members of the second mob, led by drunken Cunningham Sr., intended to take justice into their own hands by lynching Robinson before he could stand trial and probably would have hurt Atticus to accomplish their goal. However, Scout with her innocent neighborly comments directed to Cunningham reminds him of his humanity, and the tense situation diffuses as Cunningham breaks up the crowd, telling them all to go home.

Since all of these events intensify the action and the reader's emotions, we know Lee is using these events to weave a web of tension that leads up to the trial.

In Sherman Alexie's "This is What it Means to Say Phoenix, Arizona," what is the significance of Thomas's story of the two Indian boys who wanted...

Sherman Alexie's story "This is What it Means to Say Phoenix, Arizona" centers around the idea of escaping the reservation. Victor, the primary character in the story, is forced to confront this idea after his father leaves and then dies much later in Phoenix. However, this idea of escape is present throughout the entire story (and is actually present in most of this collection's stories).

The story about the Indian boys who wanted to become...

Sherman Alexie's story "This is What it Means to Say Phoenix, Arizona" centers around the idea of escaping the reservation. Victor, the primary character in the story, is forced to confront this idea after his father leaves and then dies much later in Phoenix. However, this idea of escape is present throughout the entire story (and is actually present in most of this collection's stories).

The story about the Indian boys who wanted to become warriors occurs in a flashback. Victor is thinking about his childhood friendship with Thomas Builds-the-Fire, who loves telling stories. Here is the story Thomas tells Victor:

"There were these two Indian boys who wanted to be warriors. But it was too late to be warriors in the old way. All the horses were gone. So the two Indian boys stole a car and drove to the city. They parked the stolen car in front of the police station and then hitchhiked back home to the reservation. When they got back, all their friends cheered and their parents’ eyes shone with pride. You were very brave, everybody said to the two Indian boys. Very brave."

This story illustrates this desire for escape, even if it's only temporary. In Indian tradition, tribes often looked to warriors for leadership. Crazy Horse, the Lakota Indian who led the Battle at Little Big Horn, is an example. However, hardly anyone in these stories leaves the reservation. In Thomas's story, the boys commit three acts of rebellion: they steal a car, mock the police, and hitchhike. These acts of defiance against a system that seems set against them are inspiring to the boys because defiance is the only way they know how to be warriors.

What was your reaction to the conflict between Jing-Mei and her mother?

This question has no single correct answer.  It's going to be different for different readers.  I have read "Two Kinds" many times.  My reaction to Jing-Mei and Suyuan's conflict changes.  

The first time that I read the story, I completely supported Jing-Mei, her attitude, and her actions.  Of course I was an opinionated, high strung, teenager the first time that I read it.  I thought that I knew everything.  I thought that my parents...

This question has no single correct answer.  It's going to be different for different readers.  I have read "Two Kinds" many times.  My reaction to Jing-Mei and Suyuan's conflict changes.  

The first time that I read the story, I completely supported Jing-Mei, her attitude, and her actions.  Of course I was an opinionated, high strung, teenager the first time that I read it.  I thought that I knew everything.  I thought that my parents didn't know anything, and I thought that they were out to ruin my fun by making be something that I didn't want to be.  Jing-Mei's character resonated deeply with me, so I sided with her.  

Of course now that I've been teaching for thirteen years and have three children of my own, I don't side with Jing-Mei anymore.  Suyuan's character is much more relatable to me now. She wants her daughter to work hard.  She wants her daughter to use all of her natural talents.  She wants to help Jing-Mei be the best that she can be.  I get that.  That's what I try to coax out of the athletes that I coach, and I have some that just don't want anything to do with it.  It's frustrating, which is exactly how Suyuan feels.  That's why now, I react with much more understanding and sympathy toward Suyuan, and I get frustrated and a bit angry with Jing-Mei's stubbornness.  

What would happen to temperature on Mercury during the day if a sunspot was directly in line with its surface?

If a sunspot were pointed right at Mercury in this way, the planet would become even more mind-bogglingly hot.

Sunspots look dark in our visual spectrum, so we might suspect that they are colder (or at least less hot) than the rest of the Sun; but in fact they are hotter. They emit even more energy than "normal" Solar surface; it's simply in the form of UV radiation and charged particles that our eyes cannot see.

We still don't really understand what causes sunspots or how to predict them; but we do know that several major climate events in Earth's history have been triggered by particularly high or low levels of sunspots.

Mercury already reaches temperatures over 700 Kelvin (290 Kelvin is comfortable, 310 Kelvin is hot---700 Kelvin is approaching the melting point of aluminum), so with a sunspot pointed right at it, it might well exceed 735 Kelvin, making it for a brief time even hotter than Venus.

But since Mercury has no atmosphere, it cools off very quickly, and by midnight that same spot on the planet would actually become extremely cold---as cold as 100 kelvin at the surface, which is cold enough to free CO2 into dry ice.

Mercury's temperature swings wildly; at noon you can melt aluminum, but at midnight you get dry ice. Of course, that's partly because the day is longer than the year.

What are the characteristics of Mrs. Walker in "The Devil and Tom Walker"?

Mrs. Walker is a miserly woman always battling with her husband.

Mrs. Walker does not have a good relationship with her husband.  She hides things from him and fights with him.

He had a wife as miserly as himself; they were so miserly that they even conspired to cheat each other. Whatever the woman could lay hands on she hid away …

In many ways, Walker’s wife is described as just as bad as he...

Mrs. Walker is a miserly woman always battling with her husband.

Mrs. Walker does not have a good relationship with her husband.  She hides things from him and fights with him.

He had a wife as miserly as himself; they were so miserly that they even conspired to cheat each other. Whatever the woman could lay hands on she hid away …

In many ways, Walker’s wife is described as just as bad as he is.  She was “fierce of temper, loud of tongue, and strong of arm.”  Basically, she was a nagging and possibly abusive wife.  Tom could not wait to get away from her.  It is even suggested that he could easily deal with the devil after having put up with her.

Walker does not normally confide in his wife, but it is not every day that a man gets a chance to make a deal with the devil.  He tells her, and she encourages him to take the chance.

All her avarice was awakened at the mention of hidden gold, and she urged her husband to comply with the black man's terms, and secure what would make them wealthy for life. 

Tom does not want to make a deal with the devil because it is her idea.  This does not stop her.  It is even suggested that she tried to make the deal first, before he could, and that is why she disappeared.  Of course, with her out the way he makes the deal.  He didn't want to share the gold with her, but as long as she was out of the picture that was fine.

To have a wife so bad that the devil is an improvement would be a difficult thing for any man.  Tom is no pillar of virtue, but the implication is that she drove him to it.  He was tired of her miserly ways, and wanted something for himself. 

`(2x^3 - 4x^2 - 15x + 5)/(x^2 - 2x - 8)` Write the partial fraction decomposition of the rational expression.

`(2x^3-4x^2-15x+5)/(x^2-2x-8)`

Since the above rational expression is an improper rational expression , so the first step is to divide and express the expression as a sum of simpler fractions such that the degree of the polynomial in the numerator is less than the degree of the polynomial in the denominator.

Dividing the polynomial using long division method yields,

`(2x^3-4x^2-15x+5)/(x^2-2x-8)=2x+(x+5)/(x^2-2x-8)`  

Since the polynomials do not completely divide, we have to continue with the partial fractions...

`(2x^3-4x^2-15x+5)/(x^2-2x-8)`

Since the above rational expression is an improper rational expression , so the first step is to divide and express the expression as a sum of simpler fractions such that the degree of the polynomial in the numerator is less than the degree of the polynomial in the denominator.

Dividing the polynomial using long division method yields,

`(2x^3-4x^2-15x+5)/(x^2-2x-8)=2x+(x+5)/(x^2-2x-8)`  

Since the polynomials do not completely divide, we have to continue with the partial fractions of the remainder expression,

Now let's factorize the denominator of the remainder expression,

`x^2-2x-8=x^2-4x+2x-8`

`=x(x-4)+2(x-4)`

`=(x+2)(x-4)`

Let,`(x+5)/(x^2-2x-8)=A/(x+2)+B/(x-4)`

`=(A(x-4)+B(x+2))/((x+2)(x-4))`

`=(Ax-4A+Bx+2B)/((x+2)(x-4))`

`=(x(A+B)-4A+2B)/((x+2)(x-4))`

`:.(x+5)=x(A+B)-4A+2B`

Equating the coefficients of the like terms,

`A+B=1`           ----- equation 1

`-4A+2B=5`  ------ equation 2

Now solve the above equations to get the solutions of A and B,

From equation 1,

`A=1-B`

 substitute the above expression of A in equation 2 ,

`-4(1-B)+2B=5`

`-4+4B+2B=5`

`6B=5+4`

`B=9/6`

`B=3/2`

Plug the value of B in equation 1,

`A+3/2=1`

`A=1-3/2`

`A=-1/2`

`(x+5)/(x^2-2x-8)=-1/(2(x+2))+3/(2(x-4))`

`:.(2x^3-4x^2-15x+5)/(x^2-2x-8)=2x-1/(2(x+2))+3/(2(x-4))`

Is the narrator in "This Is What It Means to Say Phoenix, Arizona" reliable?

Generally, it's not a bad idea to go into every piece of literature, especially those written in first-person point-of-view, with the belief that the narrator is unreliable. Since Sherman Alexie's "This is What it Means to Say Phoenix, Arizona" is written in third-person, the narrator might seem more reliable. However, it's still okay to think about this narrator as having his own agenda. (Is he promoting a cause or idea? Or does he...

Generally, it's not a bad idea to go into every piece of literature, especially those written in first-person point-of-view, with the belief that the narrator is unreliable. Since Sherman Alexie's "This is What it Means to Say Phoenix, Arizona" is written in third-person, the narrator might seem more reliable. However, it's still okay to think about this narrator as having his own agenda. (Is he promoting a cause or idea? Or does he seem to be rooting for a character?) In this story, I think it's safe to assume that the answer is yes. 

Throughout the story, there's a sense that the narrator wants the reader to feel the pain of Victor and all native people. This is clear from the second paragraph of the story in which the narrator points out the injustice that Indians on a reservation face: "Victor didn't have any money. Who does have money on a reservation, except the cigarette and fireworks salespeople?" This sense of injustice and pain runs throughout the story, from the Tribal Council's refusal to pay for Victor's trip to Phoenix to deal with his dead father's arrangements, to the mundanity of reservation life.

In addition, the narrator promotes the idea that Thomas Builds-the-Fire has some type of mystical Native American power. When introducing Thomas, the narrator discusses his history with Victor's father, and states plainly that "Thomas had known that Victor's father was going to leave, knew it before anyone." This seed of certainty in Thomas's supernatural abilities characterize the man as someone special.

While the narrator in "This is What it Means to Say Phoenix, Arizona" seems to be telling a straight-forward story, it's clear the story reflects the beliefs and values of the culture in which it takes place. This doesn't mean the narrator is unreliable—just that the story does come, like most stories, from a particular perspective.

In my Human Geography class we are having a debate on how globalization affects culture. I need some examples of how globalization is bad for the...

In general, globalization is said to have a negative impact on cultures because it exposes them to the ways of other people.  The people in a given country get to see how things are in many other countries and they have the opportunity to change their own ways in response.  While they do not always change, they have more chances to do so because of globalization.  When they do decide to change, their culture is “hurt” in the sense that it is changed and it moves away from the way it had been in the past. In discussing this, I will focus on one state of the Federated States of Micronesia because I grew up in that state and am familiar with the effects of globalization there.

One aspect of culture is language and language can be changed or even destroyed by globalization.  The original language of my island has been severely altered as loan words have entered the language.  In some cases, loan words push out native words, which can be lost.  For example, I do not know the native word for “lose” because the English word “lose” has come to be universally used.  More seriously, languages can be lost completely.   As people from the island move to Hawaii or the Mainland US, their children tend to forget the language, reducing the number of native speakers in the world.  All government business is conducted in English because the languages of the FSM are not mutually intelligible.  This helps make English more important and can erode the prestige of local languages, making people less likely to speak them.

Customs, of course, change as well.  Thirty years ago, it was acceptable for women to go topless but not for them to wear shorts.  Under outside influence, the opposite is now true.  More importantly, native feasts on important occasions (which could happen as much as once a month) used to require people to come and spend 3 or 4 days doing various cultural activities.  This practice is being eroded because Western styles of work do not allow people to take off of work and go spend time doing traditional activities during work hours.  This helps to kill some cultural practices like the long feasts that used to be central to the culture.

Religion can be changed as well.  No one actually knows the original religion of my island anymore.  Christian missionaries came about 150 years ago and influenced natives to abandon traditional religion.  Now, everyone on the island is Christian.

Musical styles have changed.  Music was once largely a capella.  When Westerners came, instruments like guitars were introduced.  Recently, exposure to music from outside has changed things much more drastically.  Almost all music now is set to light reggae beats.

Government has been affected.  The island used to be ruled by hereditary chiefs.  Now, the island is part of a state of the FSM.  Leaders are elected and the hereditary chiefs only have cultural, not legal power.

Of course, not all aspects of culture change.  People still speak the native language at home. They still engage in some traditional cultural practices.  However, globalization has exposed them to new ways and they have accepted many of them.  This erodes the native culture and, therefore, we can say globalization is bad for culture.

What is a summary of the poem "Ex Basketball Player," and how does the topic relate to the poem?

"Ex-Basketball Player" by John Updike defines Flick as what he used to be, while there is no definition of what he has become. For, in the present, Flick Webb's life is merely spent in a routine of mediocrity and his past glory is gone.

John Updike's title, "Ex-Basketball Player," complements the metaphoric meaning of Flick's name since he has been stellar only for a brief "flick" of the spotlight in time. All he is now is...

"Ex-Basketball Player" by John Updike defines Flick as what he used to be, while there is no definition of what he has become. For, in the present, Flick Webb's life is merely spent in a routine of mediocrity and his past glory is gone.

John Updike's title, "Ex-Basketball Player," complements the metaphoric meaning of Flick's name since he has been stellar only for a brief "flick" of the spotlight in time. All he is now is merely what he has been. For, Flick Webb, who was a former basketball star for his high school team, now works at Berth's Garage, where he towers over "the idiot pumps." While he was in school, he "racked up" three hundred ninety points, "a county record still." However, while he was in school, Flick never learned a trade, so all he does is sell gas, checks oil, and changes flat tires. When he is not at the gas station, Flick just "hangs around" Mae's luncheonette. Now, the only crowd that Flick faces are merely the "bright applauding tiers" of packaged candy and cookies. His life has become a mockery of what it once was as he cannot go beyond his glorified days in high school.

'

What message does "The Minister's Black Veil" convey?

"The Minister's Black Veil" conveys the idea that we are all sinful by nature, and yet we hide our sinful natures from one another in an attempt to portray ourselves as sinless.  In this way, we erect a figurative veil between ourselves and everyone else so that they may not see our sinfulness.  We even attempt to hide our sinfulness from God, to no avail.  Further, our insistence on hoarding our secret sins and hiding them from the world seriously injures our relationships because it means that we can never truly know or be known, fully, by anyone else.  Even the most loving partners exist with this veil between them.

When Mr. Hooper's fiancee, Elizabeth, confronts him with the rumors which are circulating about why he wears the veil, he says, 

"If I hide my face for sorrow, there is cause enough [...] and if I cover it for secret sin, what mortal might not do the same?"

With this question, Mr. Hooper admits that he has the weight of secret sin on his soul and that he knows every other human being to bear this weight as well, including Elizabeth.  Even on his deathbed, when others tremble at his unwillingness to remove the veil, he says,

"Tremble also at each other!  [....] When the friend shows his inmost heart to his friend; the lover to his best beloved; when man does not vainly shrink from the eye of his Creator, loathsomely treasuring up the secret of his sin; then deem me a monster, for the symbol beneath which I have lived, and die!  I look around me, and, lo! on every visage a Black Veil!"

With these lines, Mr. Hooper has been more open about the meaning of the black veil than he ever has been, publicly, before.  (He did reveal a great deal to Elizabeth alone.)  He insists that he is not a monster because he has worn this veil, and it is ironic that he has been shunned because of this physical symbol that means nothing on its own but only acquires meaning because of what it represents.  The veil is meant to symbolize the sinful monstrosity in each of us, our capacity for dissembling, and our desire to hide our true natures from each other and from God.  He sees a figuratively black veil on each face because every person does this; every person tries to hide their true natures.  

How did Armand react to the letter from his mother?

In Kate Chopin's story, "Desiree's Baby," she tells the tale of Desiree, a woman of unknown origin, who marries a man of good family name and has a baby. Because the child eventually shows signs of black heritage, the husband, Armand, blames Desiree and says she must have black heritage since no one knows where she came from. The final scene of the story shows Armand finding and reading a letter his mother wrote to...

In Kate Chopin's story, "Desiree's Baby," she tells the tale of Desiree, a woman of unknown origin, who marries a man of good family name and has a baby. Because the child eventually shows signs of black heritage, the husband, Armand, blames Desiree and says she must have black heritage since no one knows where she came from. The final scene of the story shows Armand finding and reading a letter his mother wrote to his father admitting that she was black, thus making Armand the one who has black heritage, not Desiree. 

Chopin ends the story there. The reader does not get to see Armand's reaction to this information. We can assume he acted one of two ways. He might have felt badly and regretted blaming his wife and sending her and his child away. On the other hand, he, being the proud man he was, might have burned the letter and told no one of this information. Chopin leaves Armand's reaction up to the reader. Textual clues from the story can support either possible reaction. This type of ending is a trademark for Chopin--she often writes a shocking ending and leaves some of the details off so there might be an open interpretation. 

What is Act IV, Scene 1 in Macbeth about?

This scene is highly significant to the course of the play. In Act IV, Scene 1, Macbeth visits the witches again, seeking answers to pressing questions about his rise to power and his future. The witches, who open the scene (along with Hecate) by concocting a spell, answer him by summoning a series of visions. The first vision is an "Armed Head," which warns Macbeth to "Beware the Thane of Fife (Macduff.)" The next is...

This scene is highly significant to the course of the play. In Act IV, Scene 1, Macbeth visits the witches again, seeking answers to pressing questions about his rise to power and his future. The witches, who open the scene (along with Hecate) by concocting a spell, answer him by summoning a series of visions. The first vision is an "Armed Head," which warns Macbeth to "Beware the Thane of Fife (Macduff.)" The next is a "bloody child," which informs Macbeth that "none of woman born" can harm him. A third apparition, which takes the form of a "Child Crowned, with a tree in his hand," reassures Macbeth that he cannot be defeated until Birnam Wood (a forest) marches against Dunsinane (Macbeth's palace.) In the final vision, Macbeth sees Banquo's image alongside eight kings, that are clearly intended to represent his heirs. Enraged by this, Macbeth demands that the witches answer his questions directly, but they depart, leaving him with his doubts. Macbeth decides to act on the visions, ordering the murder of Macduff's family--he learns from Lennox that Macduff has fled to England--and he is also emboldened by the second and the third visions. Yet the whole encounter leaves him questioning the motives and the trustworthiness of the witches. He exclaims "damn'd all those that trust them," a sentiment he repeats when he discovers, at the end of the play, that they have deceived him.

How does Lady Macbeth show control in Act 2, Scene 2 of Macbeth?

Lady Macbeth maintains control of the situation (and her husband) in many ways in Act 2, Scene 2.  

First, she instructs Macbeth on how to think about the act he has just committed; when he claims, "This is a sorry sight," she replies, "A foolish thought, to say a sorry sight" (2.2.28, 2.2.29).  Further, when he expresses his anxiety about his inability to speak the word "Amen" immediately after he'd stabbed Duncan, she tells...

Lady Macbeth maintains control of the situation (and her husband) in many ways in Act 2, Scene 2.  

First, she instructs Macbeth on how to think about the act he has just committed; when he claims, "This is a sorry sight," she replies, "A foolish thought, to say a sorry sight" (2.2.28, 2.2.29).  Further, when he expresses his anxiety about his inability to speak the word "Amen" immediately after he'd stabbed Duncan, she tells him to

Consider it not so deeply [....].  
These deeds must not be thought 
After these ways; so, it will make us mad. (2.2. 41-46)  

She wants him to stop obsessing about the murder because she fears that such obsessive thinking will ultimately drive them insane. They need to move on.

Second, Lady Macbeth alone has the foresight and wherewithal to properly frame the chamberlains for Duncan's murder. When Macbeth returns to her, he seems to be in shock and still carries the daggers he used with him.  She asks, 

Why did you bring these daggers from the place?
They must lie there.  Go, carry them and smear
The sleepy grooms with blood.  (2.2.62-64)

She knows that the murder weapons must be found with the servants if others are to believe they committed the murder.  When Macbeth refuses to go back into the room with Duncan's body, Lady Macbeth places the daggers there herself. When she returns to Macbeth, she chastises him for his cowardice, further showing the control she exercises over her husband:

My hands are of your color, but I shame
To wear a heart so white [....].
How easy it is, then!  Your constancy
Hath left you unattended.  (2.2.82-88)

While Macbeth laments the act, fears the eternal consequences of what he's done, and seems to cower before a corpse that cannot hurt him, Lady Macbeth manages the situation and her husband with apparent ease.  (Though we find out, later, that her conscience begins to eat away at her, too.)

In "The Bet," the banker believes “on my part it was the caprice of a pampered man" that he took the bet with the lawyer. Why does he think so at...

The impending danger of getting bankrupt by losing two million rubles to the lawyer makes the banker curse himself for his present predicament. The story begins in retrospection when the banker recalls how he got into this big trouble.

Contrary to his expectation, the lawyer has been able to stay in solitary confinement for fifteen years. Now, it’s only one night to go and he will have to part with his two million rubles.

For the banker had "millions beyond his reckoning," he had never valued money. In the past fifteen years, "desperate gambling on the Stock Exchange, wild speculation" and self-indulgence have "led to the decline of his fortune and the proud, fearless, self-confident millionaire had become a banker of middling rank, trembling at every rise and fall in his investments."

If he loses his two millions to the lawyer, he would be deprived of the "last penny" he has got. 

Finding himself trapped and helpless, the banker has nobody else to accuse but himself. He laments the moment when he had staked his millions for a "nonsensical and meaningless" bet.

Now, when he has to part with his millions of rubles, he realizes that it was solely “the caprice of a pampered man” that has put him into such a difficult situation. He realizes the futility of the bet, which has brought him no good.

He laments his decision for he fears he'll "be utterly ruined."

Chekov might be suggesting to his readers that quite often we act or make decisions impulsively, without considering the outcome of such actions. Acting this way often gets us into big trouble. We ought to be doing things in a careful and thoughtful manner.

What evidence from the text supports the claim that Mr. Lewis is both a caring man and a jokester?

In Chapter 11, Mr. Lewis displays his caring nature by offering Bud a sandwich, apple, and a red pop when he sees him walking alone at 2:30 a.m. on a road towards Owosso, Michigan. Mr. Lewis not only gives Bud food but also offers him a ride to Grand Rapids, and gives Bud his coat to keep him warm on the ride home. On the ride back to Flint, Michigan, Mr. Lewis jokes with Bud...

In Chapter 11, Mr. Lewis displays his caring nature by offering Bud a sandwich, apple, and a red pop when he sees him walking alone at 2:30 a.m. on a road towards Owosso, Michigan. Mr. Lewis not only gives Bud food but also offers him a ride to Grand Rapids, and gives Bud his coat to keep him warm on the ride home. On the ride back to Flint, Michigan, Mr. Lewis jokes with Bud by asking him if he's ever been in the army. Mr. Lewis says, "Well, I've got to tell you, I haven't heard so many 'sirs' since I was back at Fort Gordon in Georgia training for the Big War" (Curtis 113). Bud recognizes that Mr. Lewis is only teasing him and continues to drink the red pop. Before Bud falls asleep, Mr. Lewis asks him if he can hand him a bottle of blood because he hasn't eaten all day. Bud smiles because he knows Mr. Lewis is joking about being a vampire. Mr. Lewis graciously allows him to the spend the night at his daughter's house and lets Bud eat breakfast with them. During breakfast, Mr. Lewis continually makes jokes about his daughter's cooking abilities and teases Bud about his head being shaped like a peanut. Throughout the entire meal, Mr. Lewis and his grandchildren laugh and joke.

Compare and contrast Max and Kevin. In what ways are they similar? In what ways are they different? In what ways do their differences compliment...

Let's start with differences between Max and Kevin, because those are more obvious.  First there is the obvious difference in looks between Max and Kevin.  Max is huge.  I mean he is a really big kid for his age, and it makes him stand out.  That doesn't help with his already self-conscious mind.  Contrast that with Kevin who is small, and on top of that he looks sickly (because he is).  Despite his small size...

Let's start with differences between Max and Kevin, because those are more obvious.  First there is the obvious difference in looks between Max and Kevin.  Max is huge.  I mean he is a really big kid for his age, and it makes him stand out.  That doesn't help with his already self-conscious mind.  Contrast that with Kevin who is small, and on top of that he looks sickly (because he is).  Despite his small size though, Kevin has self confidence to spare, while Max sorely lacks self confidence.  Part of that is because Max isn't that smart to begin with, but he makes it worse by not trying to hard.  Freak on the other hand is "freakishly" smart.  

Their attitudes on life are different as well.  Kevin has an innate seize the day attitude, which is likely because he knows that he doesn't have a long life ahead of him.  Max does not have that kind of positive outlook.  If it were left up to Max, he would never come out of his "down under."  Max flat out wants to distance himself from other people.  

Despite appearing to be vastly different characters, Max and Kevin are alike in a lot of ways.  Both characters are social outcasts.  Both characters are social outcasts for the same reason too.  They look "weird."  Max because he's huge and resembles his murdering father.  Kevin because he's so small and frail looking.  He's described as being 3 feet tall and has to walk around on crutches.  Even Max makes a snap judgment about Kevin.  His initial description of him is a "crippled-up yellow haired midget." 

Both Max and Kevin are broken characters as well.  Kevin is physically broken by the disease ravaging his body, and Max is psychologically broken, because he witnessed the murder of his own mother. . . by his father.  

What are advantages for designer babies? Are there more pros than cons? Should i be against it?

It would be impossible to list out every single pro and con and then decide whether there are more pros and cons. Also, some factors may be more important to you so there are several things you should consider before making an informed opinion. I will answer your first question, and list out potential advantages, although this will not be an exhaustive list.

The most obvious advantage for "designer babies", or being able to select...

It would be impossible to list out every single pro and con and then decide whether there are more pros and cons. Also, some factors may be more important to you so there are several things you should consider before making an informed opinion. I will answer your first question, and list out potential advantages, although this will not be an exhaustive list.

The most obvious advantage for "designer babies", or being able to select for certain traits in offspring, would be for medical purposes. Certain diseases, like Down's syndrome or cystic fibrosis, can be prevented by selecting for embryos that do not carry the mutation. There is also a lot of evidence now that certain genes predispose for certain diseases, such as cardiovascular diseases or cancer. These diseases can potentially be eliminated, or at least reduced, through designer babies.

Another advantage, although this is a more ethically ambiguous topic, is being able to select for non-medically related traits. For example, parents would be able to choose the sex, hair color, eye color, etc of their child. Even though genetics does not dictate all of our traits (nurture, or environment also plays an important role), this would in theory allow parents to pre-determine what their child will look or behave like, to some extent.

There are many ethical questions to consider when you are trying to decide whether you are for or against this issue. For example, should parents be allowed to select for traits of their child? Most people would not have a problem against selecting for healthy children, but where do you draw the line whether something is necessary or just desirable? What does this mean for parents who are unable to afford to "design" their babies? What will a society of "designed" and "normal" children be like?

In short, the technology behind designer babies has huge potential to eliminate or reduce many diseases, but the ethical issues and regulation around the use of this technology remains controversial.

`(x^4 + 2x^3 + 4x^2 + 8x + 2)/(x^3 + 2x^2 + x)` Write the partial fraction decomposition of the improper rational expression.

A bit more extension for my above solution 

Now in the above expression we need to simplify the

`(2x-1)/(x^3 + 2x^2 + x)`
It is as follows

`(2x-1)/(x^3 + 2x^2 + x) = (2x-1)/(x(x+1)^2)`

`(2x-1)/(x(x+1)^2)= (a/x) + (b/(x+1))+(c/(x+1)^2))`

on simplification we get
`(2x-1)= (a(x+1)^2)+(bx(x+1))+cx`

As the roots of the denominator `(x(x+1)^2)` are` 0 , -1` . We can solve the unknown parameters by
plugging the values of `x` .

when `x=0` , we get
`a=-1 `
when `x=(-1)` we get
`c=3`

As we know the `a,c` values , we can find the value of `b` as

`2x-1 = (-1)(x+1)^2 + bx(x+1)+3x`
`2x-1 = bx^2+x+bx-x^2-1`
`2x-1 = x^2(b-1)+x(b+1)-1`
on comparing we get
`b+1 =2`
=> `b=1 `
so, `(2x-1)/(x^3 + 2x^2 + x) = ((-1)/x)+(1/(x+1))+(3/(x+1^2))`
so, the partial fraction for

`(x^4 + 2x^3 + 4x^2 + 8x + 2)/(x^3 + 2x^2 + x) = x+ (3/x)+ (2x-1)/(x^3 + 2x^2 + x)`

`=x+ (3/x)+ ((-1)/x)+(1/(x+1))+(3/(x+1^2))`
`= x+(2/x)+(1/(x+1))+(3/(x+1)^2).`

In an earthquake, the point where the first movement of rock occurs and energy is released is the epicenter. True or false?

This statement is false. The point where the first movement of rocks occur and energy is released is known as the focus. This point is also known as the hypocenter. It is at this location that the stored energy is suddenly released deep within the Earth. This energy then travels to the Earth surface in the form of p-wave and s-waves. Focus is often confused (especially by media such as newspapers, etc.) with...

This statement is false. The point where the first movement of rocks occur and energy is released is known as the focus. This point is also known as the hypocenter. It is at this location that the stored energy is suddenly released deep within the Earth. This energy then travels to the Earth surface in the form of p-wave and s-waves. Focus is often confused (especially by media such as newspapers, etc.) with another earthquake related term- the epicenter. While focus is the point of origin of earthquake and is deep within the Earth, epicenter is actually a point on Earth's surface, directly above the focus. We can locate the epicenter of an earthquake, by using data from 3 different seismographic stations.

Hope this helps.  

What was Jessie's relationship like with Purvis?

Interesting question! In the book The Slave Dancer by Paula Fox, Purvis and Jessie had an unusual relationship.

Foremost, Jessie appeared to trust Purvis more than some of the other sailors, especially Ben Stout. Throughout the story, Purvis accomplished admirable tasks. For example, he took the blame for stealing from the captain’s personal food supply, despite his innocence. He also cared for Jessie by not letting Jessie’s homesickness overwhelm him. As the text revealed:

“Purvis...

Interesting question! In the book The Slave Dancer by Paula Fox, Purvis and Jessie had an unusual relationship.

Foremost, Jessie appeared to trust Purvis more than some of the other sailors, especially Ben Stout. Throughout the story, Purvis accomplished admirable tasks. For example, he took the blame for stealing from the captain’s personal food supply, despite his innocence. He also cared for Jessie by not letting Jessie’s homesickness overwhelm him. As the text revealed:

“Purvis with his horrible coarse jokes, his bawling and cursing, Purvis whom I trusted."

However, there were also negative aspects of Purvis and Jessie’s relationship. Foremost, Purvis was one of the sailors who kidnapped Jessie. Furthermore, Purvis appeared angry whenever Jessie cared for any of the slaves, which caused tension in their relationship. As the text showed, Jessie’s perspective of Purvis was:

“gratitude mixed with disappointment. I thought of Purvis.”

Thus, in the story, Purvis and Jessie had a more complex relationship. Although Jessie trusted Purvis and appreciated his friendship, Jessie was still disheartened by his actions and beliefs about slavery.

How did Andrew Jackson solve the nullification crisis?

The nullification crisis that arose during Andrew Jackson’s presidency was a serious challenge that he had to face. The people of South Carolina was very unhappy with the high protective tariff of 1828 because they believed it hurt the South while benefitting the North. John C. Calhoun believed a state should be able to reject a law if it hurts a state or region while helping another state or region. This would violate the Constitution...

The nullification crisis that arose during Andrew Jackson’s presidency was a serious challenge that he had to face. The people of South Carolina was very unhappy with the high protective tariff of 1828 because they believed it hurt the South while benefitting the North. John C. Calhoun believed a state should be able to reject a law if it hurts a state or region while helping another state or region. This would violate the Constitution because the Constitution states that federal laws are supreme.

President Jackson had a clear stance on this issue. He said that states couldn’t nullify federal laws. He indicated that the tariff would be enforced throughout the country. When South Carolina threatened to secede over this issue, Jackson indicated there would be a military response by the federal government. President Jackson was not going to just allow South Carolina to secede. Fortunately, a compromise was reached that allowed for a gradual lowering of the tariff over a ten-year period. South Carolina stayed in the Union and the issue was resolved, at least in the short-term.

What is an agreement or contract made among a group of people?

An agreement or contract made among a group of people is called a social contract.  Social contracts have existed throughout time.  A social contract does not necessarily have to be written.  It can be implied and understood between the parties involved. 

One notable thinker of the Age of Enlightenment was Thomas Hobbes. He believed that peopled needed governments to impose order and that people in a society should agree to give up some freedoms to...

An agreement or contract made among a group of people is called a social contract.  Social contracts have existed throughout time.  A social contract does not necessarily have to be written.  It can be implied and understood between the parties involved. 

One notable thinker of the Age of Enlightenment was Thomas Hobbes. He believed that peopled needed governments to impose order and that people in a society should agree to give up some freedoms to a stronger power in exchange for peace and safety. Hobbes called this exchange between society and government the social contract. The Magna Carta (1215) is one of the earliest social and political contracts. 

Jean-Jacques Rousseau believed that government should work for the benefit of the common good, not just for the wealthy. 

What then is government?  It is an intermediary body established between the subjects and the sovereign . . .  

—Jean Jacques Rousseau, The Social Contract, 1763

What happens when a source of energy causes a medium to vibrate?

Mechanical waves, such as sound waves, would be created if an energy source caused a medium to vibrate.

Energy vibrating a medium produces energy waves that are mechanical waves, which means that they require a medium through which to travel.

A medium refers to a substance through which energy can be transferred from one location to another, from one particle to another. A medium can be either a solid, liquid, or a gas. As an...

Mechanical waves, such as sound waves, would be created if an energy source caused a medium to vibrate.

Energy vibrating a medium produces energy waves that are mechanical waves, which means that they require a medium through which to travel.

A medium refers to a substance through which energy can be transferred from one location to another, from one particle to another. A medium can be either a solid, liquid, or a gas. As an illustration, the mechanical waves of sound travel the fastest through solid because the particles are so close to one another.

Mechanical waves can be:

1. traverse, with up-and-down crests and troughs


2. longitudinal, with compressions and rarefactions


3. surface, with combined up-and-down and back-and-forth motion (combining traverse and longitudinal characteristics)

To continue the illustration, sound waves are classified as longitudinal waves. Longitudinal waves, with compressions and rarefactions, move in a back and forth motion.

What is examples of pathos and ethos in the story "The Yellow Wallpaper"?

To start, "pathos" and "ethos" are essentially types of "appeals" or arguments meant to play to specific features of the audience to achieve the desired persuasion. Pathos are expressions that invoke emotional responses, specifically ones of sympathy, pity, and sorrow. Ethos attempts to use the character or qualifications of a person to get the intended audience to align with their thinking. 

The short story, "The Yellow Wallpaper" employs these literary methods repeatedly, especially ethos. The...

To start, "pathos" and "ethos" are essentially types of "appeals" or arguments meant to play to specific features of the audience to achieve the desired persuasion. Pathos are expressions that invoke emotional responses, specifically ones of sympathy, pity, and sorrow. Ethos attempts to use the character or qualifications of a person to get the intended audience to align with their thinking. 

The short story, "The Yellow Wallpaper" employs these literary methods repeatedly, especially ethos. The main character, an unnamed woman, has been suffering from what is termed "temporary nervous depression" following the birth of her first child. Her physician husband, John, has moved them into a rented mansion for the summer with the intent of having the main character recuperate away from the stresses of family and friends. Largely restricted to the former nursery, which features an odious yellow wallpaper pattern, the main character is waited upon closely by her sister-in-law and generally kept from stimulating tasks, like writing, reading, or extended conversation. These methods, as prescribed by her husband, are largely seen as unpleasant and frustrating by the main character. However, as ethos implies, the diagnosis and treatment are continually justified by the main character, John, and her family on the basis of his excellent reputation as a physician, and because, as the main character explains, John loves her very much and hates to see her sick.

Pathos is utilized largely by the main character towards the audience in her descriptions of her increasingly difficult circumstances. She initially draws sympathy by her explaining her "symptoms" of being too tired to do "what little" she can, of feeling too nervous to be around her child. She employs emotive language to detail that her situation is becoming more and more unbearable, especially due to the disconcerting wallpaper. In the final moments of the story, the main character once again draws upon the emotions of the audience in her justification for her barricade inside the room, stating that now John can't put her back into the wallpaper, relaying to the audience the full extent of her psychosis. 

Compare Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism in a short summary

Political unrest, confusion, and conflicts among the people led to the development of the three philosophies that sought to guide the people’s way of life amidst all the chaos. The three philosophies supported the need for respect. This was a step towards limiting the issue of conflict among the people. Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism supported the need to achieve individual goodness for the well-being of the society. The three philosophies emphasized that individuals were subject...

Political unrest, confusion, and conflicts among the people led to the development of the three philosophies that sought to guide the people’s way of life amidst all the chaos. The three philosophies supported the need for respect. This was a step towards limiting the issue of conflict among the people. Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism supported the need to achieve individual goodness for the well-being of the society. The three philosophies emphasized that individuals were subject to particular elements in their environment. Confucianism required one to be respectful of others. Legalism required that individuals be loyal subjects to their government. Daoism emphasized the need for the individual to follow the path of nature.

Legalism was based on the idea that people were inherently bad, and harsh punishment was necessary to suppress such inclinations. Confucianism and Daoism were based on the idea that people were naturally good, but they required guidance to ensure they remained on the right path. Daoism was different from the other two philosophies because it allowed some level of individualism and free thought as allowed by nature. Confucianism was different from Daoism and Legalism because its main focus was on respect for elders.

How does Deborah Lacks initially respond to Skloot's request for information in The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks?

In Chapter 6 , Lady's On The Phone, Roland Pattillo tells Rebecca Skloot that Deborah is almost fifty years old and that she still lives in Baltimore. Also, everyone in the Lacks family calls Deborah, Dale. When the chapter begins, Skloot wants to know if Pattillo can put her in touch with the Lacks family.

Pattillo is initially wary about helping Skloot, as Deborah has suffered much emotional pain in regards to the HeLa...

In Chapter 6 , Lady's On The Phone, Roland Pattillo tells Rebecca Skloot that Deborah is almost fifty years old and that she still lives in Baltimore. Also, everyone in the Lacks family calls Deborah, Dale. When the chapter begins, Skloot wants to know if Pattillo can put her in touch with the Lacks family.

Pattillo is initially wary about helping Skloot, as Deborah has suffered much emotional pain in regards to the HeLa cell fiasco. He tells Skloot to call him back the next day, which she does. Then, after extensive conversation, Pattillo finally provides Skloot with the relevant information she needs, with the caveat that she deals patiently and compassionately with Deborah.

When Skloot makes the call, she is surprised by Deborah's reaction. Deborah is more than happy for Skloot to write a book about her mother; in fact, she welcomes the telling of her mother's story because she feels that her mother has been unfairly reduced to some sort of biological anomaly by indifferent scientists. Deborah confides to Skloot that she almost suffered two strokes in two weeks due to the debatable stories she has been told in regards to her mother.

Deborah's initial exuberance and positive reaction does not last long. The next phone call between Skloot and Deborah finds that Deborah has changed her mind. The men in her family are not convinced that a book should be written about Henrietta Lacks. Obviously distressed, Deborah tells Skloot that it will be up to her to convince her father and her two brothers. After this exchange, Skloot does not hear Deborah's voice again for another year.

In Chapter 3, how is Cal’s role as a mother figure for Scout and Jem depicted?

In Chapter 3, Scout antagonized Walter Cunningham in the schoolyard for allegedly making her first day of school "start off on the wrong foot". Jem stopped her and asked why she was mad at Walter, and when he learned the problem was caused by Walter not having any lunch, Jem invited the boy to dinner at the Finch house. Jem asked Calpurnia to set an extra place for their company. Walter displayed strange table manners,...

In Chapter 3, Scout antagonized Walter Cunningham in the schoolyard for allegedly making her first day of school "start off on the wrong foot". Jem stopped her and asked why she was mad at Walter, and when he learned the problem was caused by Walter not having any lunch, Jem invited the boy to dinner at the Finch house. Jem asked Calpurnia to set an extra place for their company. Walter displayed strange table manners, most likely because he was not often presented with the kind of meal he was being given, and Scout was flabbergasted when he poured molasses all over his meal, and embarrassed him. Calpurnia pulled Scout aside to reprimand her for commenting on Walter’s table manners. This was an effort to teach Scout to respect her company and treat them like equals, regardless of their background. Cal pointed out that the Finch’s higher status over the Cunninghams didn't mean anything if Scout could not be civilized at the table. Calpurnia punished her by making her finish her dinner in the kitchen. Calpurnia straddled the roles of servant and mother in this scene. 

 

Slaps her. Makes her finish her meal in the kitchen.

What is an example of suspense in the short story, "There Will Come Soft Rains"?

I wouldn't call this the most suspenseful story ever written in the annals of literature. But that's what makes this an interesting question: what, beyond lyrical language, keeps us reading?

We can see that Bradbury creates suspense in the first lines of the story:

In the living room the voice-clock sang, Tick-tock, seven o'clock, time to get up, time to get up, seven o'clock! as if it were afraid that nobody would. The morning house...

I wouldn't call this the most suspenseful story ever written in the annals of literature. But that's what makes this an interesting question: what, beyond lyrical language, keeps us reading?

We can see that Bradbury creates suspense in the first lines of the story:

In the living room the voice-clock sang, Tick-tock, seven o'clock, time to get up, time to get up, seven o'clock! as if it were afraid that nobody would. The morning house lay empty.

That opening is one example of suspense. Why, we wonder, would the clock fear that nobody would get up? Why is the house empty? Where are the occupants? These questions create unease and encourage us to read on.

At ten o'clock, we learn this is the only house left standing in a ruined landscape, the remnant of what we now suspect has been a nuclear holocaust. 

Our suspense builds as the morning passes, hour by hour, and the house remains deserted. When an upset dog comes in, foaming at the mouth and dies, we are even more curious. What will happen? Despite the house going through its normal routine, nothing is normal. 

Another moment of suspense occurs when the kitchen catches on fire and the fire alarms go off. Will the house, this high tech mechanism, be able to save itself?