If the molecular mass of a gas increases by a factor of 4 at a constant temperature, what will its rms speed be?

Hello!

The absolute temperature (from the absolute zero) of a gas is directly proportional to the mean kinetic energy of its molecules. This energy is equal to `(M v_(rms)^2)/2,` where `M` is the molar mass of a gas (the mass of a mole of a gas). The molar mass is directly proportional to the molecule's mass, because each mole of a substance contains the same number of molecules.

The exact equation is  `v_(rms) = sqrt((3 R T)/M),` where `R` is the ideal gas constant which doesn't depend on gas properties.

Therefore if the molecule's mass increases by a factor of `4,` then the root-mean-square will decrease by the factor of `sqrt(4) = 2.`

That said, the only cause of such a change of a mass is a chemical reaction, but in that case the temperature will likely be changed too.

Do you approve of Vera's prank on Nuttel, who has a nerve problem, in "The Open Window" by Saki? Why or why not?

This is an interesting question. If Vera were my daughter and this event happened in my home, I certainly wouldn't approve of her frightening the wits out of a guest, especially a stranger who was there seeking hospitality and acquaintanceship. The fact that Framton Nuttel has some kind of nervous problem does not seem to enter into the equation. It would be just as wrong for Vera to play the same prank on a man who did not have a nerve problem. The author, Saki, chose to give Nuttel his neurosis in order to make his reaction to the three approaching hunters as headlong and impetuous as possible.

Framton grabbed wildly at his stick and hat; the hall door, the gravel drive, and the front gate were dimly noted stages in his headlong retreat. A cyclist coming along the road had to run into the hedge to avoid imminent collision.

And Vera had no way of knowing about Framton's nerve problem. He refrained from saying anything about it to her because of her tender years, but he told her Aunt Sappleton all about it when she arrived to take over as hostess. Would Vera have told Framton her ghost story if she had known he had a nerve problem? If so, I would strongly disapprove. If not, I would still disapprove but not as strongly. 

I can't help thinking that this is a story and that Vera's ghost story is a story within a story. That seems to make her prank less serious. It never really happened.

What life lessons are we taught in the poem "If"?

There are several life lessons taught in Rudyard Kipling's famous poem "If." For, this poem, addressed to Kipling's son, is a paean to the stoicism characteristic of the British of the Victorian Age, and to uprightness.

In this first stanza, Kipling initially stresses that one must "keep" one's head; that is, remain rational while others are becoming irrational and placing blame upon others rather than accepting responsibility:

If you can keep you head when all about you
Are losing theirs and blaming it on you...

Kipling also stresses self-discipline: "trust yourself when all men doubt you." "..wait and not be tired by waiting...."
And, he emphasizes manly rectitude: " Or being lied about, don't deal in lies."

Kipling emphasizes that it is important to dream and have an imagination, but control of one's imagination is necessary, as well, for one must be realistic:

If you can dream--and not make dreams your master...

One must also be strong and willing to take risks and lose, then turn and start again after watching the

...things you gave your life to, broken, and bend down to pick them up and "build'em up with worn-out tools.

In this stanza Kipling emphasizes fortitude and the ability to begin anew when necessary. A man must be able to suffer losses and start over:

If you can force your heart and nerve and sinew
To serve your turn long after they are gone,
And so hold on when there is nothing in you
Except the Will which says to them: "Hold on!"

This stanza emphasizes and extols the virtues of moral uprightness.  Kipling praises the virtue of humility--"the common touch"--and making the most of time--

...fill the unforgiving minute...with sixty seconds worth of distance won,

Then, he can conquer anything and be a true man.

Which living situation or family does Huck like best and where does he feel most a part of a family and why in The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn?

Huck Finn feels most comfortable and loved with Jim on the raft; therefore, Jim is more like family to him than anyone else.

Unlike all his other living situations, Huck feels both physically and emotionally protected by Jim. In addition, Jim uses terms of endearment for Huck, calling Huck "honey," and he cries with elation when Huck returns to him after he thought Huck was lost or possibly dead.

After Huck runs away and discovers Jim, they travel together. In Chapter 9, they explore an island near the cavern where they have been hiding after running way. One night, a frame house floats past them, and the two paddle out to it, thinking it may have something they can use. Inside, they discover a dead man who has been shot in the back; Jim quickly covers the man's head because he realizes he is Huck's father, and he does not want to traumatize the boy.

When Jim and Huck are separated in Chapter 15 after Huck is unable to tie up the raft when he lands on shore, he is worried and tries to find Jim. Huck eventually becomes exhausted, however, and falls asleep. When he awakens, Huck chases after "specks" in a canoe until he finally discovers the raft. This raft has been somewhat damaged and Jim has his head down between his knees as he sleeps with his one arm hanging over the steering oar. Unable to resist playing a trick on Jim, Huck makes him think he has merely dreamed that Huck left the raft. 

Finally, when Huck points to the debris on the raft and the broken oar, Jim realizes he has been tricked and is hurt by Huck's deception. Much like a father, he gives expression to his love for the boy first, but then reprimands him.

When I got all wore out wid work, en wid de callin' for you, en went to sleep, my heart wuz mos' broke bekase you wuz los', en I didn' k'yer no mo' what become er me en de raf'. En when I wake up en fine you back agin', all safe en soun', de tears come en I could a got down on my knees en kiss' yo' foot I's so thankful.

Jim then scolds Huck for deceiving someone who cares about him:

...how you could make a fool uv old Jim wid a lie. Dat truck dah is trash; en trash is what people is dat put dirt on de head er day fren's en makes 'em ashamed.

After experiencing the violence of the feuding Grangerfords and Shepherdsons in Chapter 18, Huck is relieved to be back on the raft with Jim:

I was powerful glad to get away from the feuds, and so was Jim to get away from the swamp. We said there warn't no home like a raft, after all. Other places do seem so cramped up and smothery, but a raft don't. You feel mighty free and easy and comfortable on a raft.

The hypocrisy of the King and the Duke and the self-righteousness of Dr. Robinson, who walks away from the Wilkinson girls after they refuse to listen to him about the two frauds, add to Huck's moral confusion. This confusion is only allayed when Huck is with Jim, whose honesty and openness has a profound effect on him.

After the King steals Jim and sells him, Huck becomes disgusted with society. Although he writes to Miss Watson informing her of Jim's capture, he tears up the letter. In doing so, he ends his moral dilemma over "stealing" her slave from her by deciding, "All right, then, I'll go to hell." Moreover, he decides Jim has all the qualities of a true and decent human being; further, he cannot deny the feelings he has for Jim. This causes Huck to follow his heart and act on behalf of Jim, who has been both a father-figure and a friend.

In the novel "The Dispossessed" Anarresti culture sought to eliminate hierarchies within its society. To this end, Odo provided no formal/legal...

The relationship between Takver and Shevek, while not expressly forbidden by the Annarean government, is highly controversial. While Le Guin explains that Odo originally set up a society with no legal form of marriage in order to prevent Annares from becoming a hierarchy like Urras, this policy becomes limiting to the young couple. Shevek and Takver feel a deep bond and desire to share their lives with each other. In this sense, the monogamous relationship between Takver and Shevek fits in with the larger theme of the story. A lack of formal contracts and institutions in which two people effectively belong to one another is only freeing for the Annareans who have no desire to enter into such contracts. By contrast, Takver and Shevek find Annarean society highly restrictive.

More tension is created when Shevek is sent away on a lengthy tour of labor. Takver is also sent away to continue her work on addressing the problem of starvation on Annares. Because marriage is not an officially recognized institution, the Annarean government has no obligation to keep the spouses together. The tension can be further resolved into a coherent theme when contrasted with the opposing tensions Shevek experiences on Urras. While the Urrasti government permits marriage, its social institutions create great pressure to conform in a different way. "The Dispossessed" uses these tensions to illustrate how even restrictions created from the purest motives will have a negative impact on someone.

When he was mayor of New York City, Michael Bloomberg proposed a ban on any "sweet drinks" more than 16 ounces. Although it was ruled illegal by...

Clearly, a ban on these drinks would intrude on personal freedom.  The issue is not whether it intrudes on personal freedom but whether it does so excessively.

Essentially every government law infringes on personal freedom in some way.  The speed limit intrudes on our freedom to drive whatever speed we want.  The ban on cocaine and heroin infringes on our freedom to do whatever we think will make us feel good.  The ban on sugary drinks would infringe on our right to eat and drink what we want.  However, while laws always infringe on our freedoms, we accept them because we think they do not intrude too much in comparison to the bad things that they prevent.

It is in this context that we have to think about the proposed NYC ban.  Does it do enough good to overcome the way in which it infringes on our freedom?  A ban would presumably help at least somewhat to reduce the problems associated with obesity in the city.  This would make people healthier and reduce the government’s need to spend on health care.  The question you have to answer for yourself, then, is whether that is enough of a benefit to justify telling people what they can and cannot drink.  One thing to think about as you consider this question: where do we draw the line?  Could the government ban us from eating large steaks (or all meat) because it thinks fat is unhealthy?  This is a matter of personal opinion.  What do you think?

As for what companies should do about this, I would say they should do two things.  First, they should advertise, telling people to fight for their right to eat and drink what they want.  Second, they should work to develop new drinks that would have less sugar. If they could do that, they would be covered in the event that such a ban does eventually end up happening.

Why does Blanche say, "Now it's time to bury someone I hate?" in Brighton Beach Memoirs?

Blanche says this after she has had a long fight with her sister, Kate. The fight is instigated in part because Blanche's date with Frank Murphy has been canceled, as Frank has had an accident. Kate feels that Blanche is too self-centered, and it is clear that Blanche's route out of her sister's house--marriage--seems nowhere in sight. Blanche resolves to move out of the house and find a job.

After she fights with Kate, Blanche begins to fight with Nora, her daughter. Nora tells Blanche she feels unloved, and Blanche responds that she is sorry, but "I am tired of apologizing. After a while it becomes your life's work and it doesn't bring any money into the house" (page 96). Blanche realizes that she has been a weak, apologetic person who has tried to make her way in life by depending on others. She has now resolved to be more independent and to find a job, feather than depending on her sister and her brother-in-law, Jack, who has just had a heart attack. Blanche says, "I've already buried someone I love. Now it's time to bury someone I hate" (page 96). By this, she means that she already buried her husband, and now she wants to bury her old, dependent self and be reborn (metaphorically) as a more independent and active person. 

What are the similarities of moral theories by Aristotle, Kant, and Mill?

The unifying factor between the three philosophers is that they all affirm ethics as the pursuit of the highest good. They, however, hold divergent views on the definition of the highest good. There are clear similarities between the philosophers, but these are shared between pairs.

The theories of Aristotle and Kant both affirm the dominant role of the agent/individual over the results of their actions. Thus, the character of the agent and their reasoning determine their moral values.

Aristotle and Kant also agree that there are actions that are intrinsically condemnable. Such actions must automatically be avoided and rejected by the agent.

Kant and Mill concur that morality is the agent’s duty. Thus, the agent is responsible for performing good deeds as defined by the two philosophers.

The theories of Aristotle and Mill are similar because they based their ideas on the agent’s quest for happiness.

Aristotle: "We always choose happiness as an end in itself and never for the sake of something else.” (C.U.A)

Mill: "Actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness; wrong as they tend to produce the reverse of happiness.” (C.U.A)

What are some ideas for an essay on 'The Age of Chaucer?'

The 'Age of Chaucer' (1340s - 1400) was a time of great social and political upheaval, therefore providing lots of topics and ideas for an essay.

Politically, for example, this period was dominated by the Hundred Years' War, a series of territorial conflicts between England and France. This war produced some of the era's most infamous battles, including Crecy (1346) and Agincourt (1415). Chaucer himself worked briefly as a soldier, though he was captured by the enemy and returned to England one year after his arrival, in 1360.

Socially, this era is also notable for the Black Death, a plague which spread across Europe and arrived in England in 1348, decimating between one-third and one-half of the population. In the aftermath of the plague, society was changed considerably: surviving peasants, for instance, demanded better wages and working conditions while the clergy suffered from a national shortage of trained priests.

This era also witnessed the Great Schism, a split in the papacy in which three different men claimed to be pope. The papacy not only lost authority and prestige during this time: the Schism also caused instability across Europe as governments were forced to back one of the claimants. This situation was not resolved until 1417, almost two decades after Chaucer's death.

For more information, please see the reference links provided.

What are three examples of characterization in "A Sound of Thunder" by Ray Bradbury?

Authors develop and reveal the qualities, mannerisms, and thoughts of the characters of their literary work through characterization.

There are five ways in which characterization can take place:

1. through a physical description of the character


2. through the character's actions


3. through the character's thoughts, feelings, and speeches


4. through the comments and reactions of other characters


5. through direct statements giving the writer's opinion of the character

The first four methods are indirect characterization; they show or dramatize a character. The last is direct characterization; the author makes comments about the character.

____________________

Here are 3 examples of characterization:

Way #2. The character's actions:
Eckels nervousness is indicated by his actions:

Eckels swayed on the padded seat, his face pale, his jaw stiff. He felt the trembling in his arms, and he looked down and found his hands tight on the new rifle

Way #3. The character's thoughts, feelings, or speech. 

After the Time Safari Machine returns with the two employees and Eckels, who has stepped off the gravity path, things appear differently to Eckels. He cannot read the sign and when he asks the strange man behind the desk who won the presidential election, he tells Eckels that a different candidate from the one who was President when he departed is in office.

Eckels felt himself fall into a chair. He fumbled crazily at the thick slime on his boots. He held up a clod of dirt, trembling, “No, it can’t be. Not a little thing like that. No!”

Way #4. The comments and reactions of other characters:

When Eckels asks why it is so important that he not step off the gravity path, the strong feelings that Travis has about the importance of not doing this are demonstrated in his speech and with his examples:

“We don’t want to change the Future. We don’t belong here in the Past.....
A dead mouse here makes an insect imbalance there, a population disproportion later, a bad harvest further on, a depression, mass starvation, and, finally, a change in social temperament in far-flung countries."

Is Heather Hoodhood in The Wednesday Wars by Gary Schmidt a dynamic or static character?

I'm going to go with Heather Hoodhood being a static character.  She and Holling do manage to emotionally connect at the end of the novel, and the reader sees perhaps a glimmer of change in her; however, I think that possible change is more of a reflection of Holling's attitude toward his sister.  The entire novel is told in the first person perspective.  I think the emotional connection shared between Heather and Holling at the end of the novel results from Holling's dynamic change and not necessarily Heather's change.

Throughout the rest of the novel, readers see Heather as a very time period specific, cliche character.   She is a stereotypical, angst filled teenager that is in constant conflict with her parents.  Heather always has some snarky remark ready for Holling, and whenever something doesn't go her way, she locks herself into her room and loudly blasts The Monkees.  There are moments when she does show kindness to Holling.  For example, she helps Holling pull down the embarrassing posters of him in his Ariel costume.  But those moments are exceptions to her normal behavior.  They are not symbolic of some kind of overall, dynamic attitude shift in Heather.  In fact, I believe that Holling sees Heather as static as well.  I believe that is why Holling doesn't even feel the need to call her by name until the very end of the novel. 

Why does Helen refer to the day as an eventful one in The Story of My Life?

Helen refers to the day as an eventful one because it was on that day that her teacher, Anne Mansfield Sullivan, came into her life.

In Chapter Four, Helen recalls the day as the most important day in all her life. It was the third of March in 1887, and Helen was three months shy of reaching her seventh year of life. She testifies that the moment of her first meeting with Anne Sullivan was one filled with light and love.

Helen remembers that, on that eventful day, Anne Sullivan gave her a doll and opened up the world of language to her by spelling out the word on Helen's hand. On that day, Helen proclaims that she also learned other words, words that made the world a new place for her.

I learned a great many new words that day. I do not remember what they all were; but I do know that mother, father, sister, teacher were among them – words that were to make the world blossom for me, "like Aaron's rod, with flowers." It would have been difficult to find a happier child than I was as I lay in my crib at the close of the eventful day and lived over the joys it had brought me, and for the first time longed for a new day to come.

How would you balance the equation:CuO(s) + HNO3 (aq) ---> Cu(No3)2 (aq) +H2O (l) ?

A balanced chemical equation is one in which the number of atoms of each element are the same on both the reactant and the product side of the equation. The given chemical equation is:

`CuO (s) + HNO_3 (aq) -> Cu(NO_3)_2 (aq) + H_2O(l)`

In this equation, copper (II) oxide reacts with nitric acid and forms copper nitrate and water. If we check the number of atoms of each element on each side of the equation, we find that the equation is not balanced. This is because there is only 1 nitrogen atom on reactant side, while there are 2 nitrogen atoms on the product side. Similarly, the equation is not balanced in terms of hydrogen and oxygen.

The balanced equation is:

`CuO (s) + 2 HNO_3 (aq) -> Cu(NO_3)_2 (aq) + H_2O (l)`

That is, 1 mole of copper oxide reacts with 2 moles of nitric acid to produce 1 mole of copper nitrate and 1 mole of water. One can check that the number of atoms of each element are the same on both sides of the equation. 

Hope this helps. 

What is the meaning of the following quotation from 1984? "The object of terrorism is terrorism. The object of oppression is oppression. The object...

This quotation explains the philosophy of leadership in Oceania but even more George Orwell's own understanding of authoritarian governments.

Orwell's 1984 was written in reaction to the rise of fascist and authoritarian governments in the twentieth century in Germany, Italy, Spain, and Russia. These movements originally practiced terrorism to gain power and when in power used tools such as oppression, murder, and torture as means of control. They tended to justify such behavior as necessary means to an end.

What this statement argues is that people who murder and torture are not fundamentally good people who act immorally out of necessity, but simply murderers and torturers. Authoritarian governments do not seek power as a means to another end, but because they want power. 

O'Brien, as a member of the Inner Party, understands this and actually exults in it, unlike Winston, who before being tortured believed the propaganda that these immoral acts were simply means to an end.

What is Mayella's mother's name? Why did Bob Ewell not marry anyone after her mother died?

Most of the details about the Ewell family are given in chapters 17 and 18, which are trial scenes. Bob Ewell's testimony is given in the second half of Chapter 17, and Mayella's in Chapter 18. In neither of these chapters are we told the name of Mayella's mother, nor any details about Bob's wife's death, such as how long ago it took place, what she died of, or what happened after.

Though we never learn the name of the hapless, now deceased Mrs. Ewell, it is easy to infer why her husband did not remarry.

Mayella Ewell is the oldest of seven children. She is nineteen years old. Assuming the children are spaced about two years apart, that would make the youngest seven years old. So we know that Mrs. Ewell died no more than seven years ago, possibly more recently than that. That would make Mayella about twelve at the time of the mother's death.

We know that Mayella went to school only two or three years. By age twelve she was probably finished with school. We know from descriptions given by Scout (as narrator), Tom Robinson, and Mayella herself that Mayella was the one who essentially kept the Ewell household running. As Tom Robinson says in Chapter 19,

"Well, I says it looked like they [the rest of the family] never help her none ... I felt right sorry for her, she seemed to try more'n the rest of 'em ..."

Probably, by the time her mother died, Mayella was already running the household. Certainly after she died, Mayella took over. She did the chores, she kept geraniums, she scraped and saved money to feed her siblings when her father drank up his welfare cheque. With Mayella around, Bob Ewell did not need a wife.

Even if Bob Ewell had been on the lookout for a woman willing to marry him, it's hard to imagine how he could have found one. He brought in no income and was a drunkard. His children lived on poached game and whatever they could find in the dump. It's hard to imagine any woman marrying such a man voluntarily.

What is a quote that describes the inequality within Maycomb's society that could be used to describe the cultural setting of To Kill a Mockingbird?

There are several scenes throughout the novel that describe Maycomb's inequality and prejudiced views towards African Americans. In Atticus's closing remarks at the Tom Robinson trial, he addresses the prejudiced jury's preconceived beliefs that Tom Robinson is already guilty simply because he is a black man. Atticus says,

"The witnesses for the state, with the exception of the sheriff of Maycomb County, have presented themselves to you gentlemen, to this court, in the cynical confidence that their testimony would not be doubted, confident that you gentlemen would go along with them on the assumption — the evil assumption — that all Negroes lie, that all Negroes are basically immoral beings, that all Negro men are not to be trusted around our women, an assumption one associates with minds of their caliber" (Lee 125).

The "evil assumption" refers to the racist ideology held by the majority of white citizens in Maycomb towards African Americans in their community. In Maycomb, white people automatically assume the worst about African Americans and believe they are all immoral individuals. In regards to inequality, African Americans are not trusted and in a court of law where every citizen is considered equal, their testimonies are dismissed simply because of the color of their skin. African Americans are not given equal treatment in their community or the court of law. They are viewed with contempt, and their individual merit is not taken into consideration by the racist citizens of Maycomb. The cultural setting of the novel takes place in 1930s Alabama, a time when Jim Crow laws segregated and discriminated against African Americans. Atticus urges the jury to look past their prejudiced beliefs and judge the case exclusively on the evidence and testimonies provided. Unfortunately, the racist jury wrongly convicts Tom Robinson, and Tom becomes yet another victim of racial injustice.

What percentage of people are able to afford a new home?

Determining how many people can afford to buy a new home depends on how you define “afford.” Generally speaking, most home buyers are expected to dedicate about 25% of their income to mortgage payments. Lenders are reluctant to make loans to potential buyers if they think they won't be able to make the payments, so they look at the income-to-mortgage percentage carefully. This is especially true now, after the disastrous role failed mortgages played in the recent recession.

Most home ownership, historically, has been driven by the middle class. In recent decades, middle class income has been more stagnant than it used to be. At the same time, fewer of the smaller, more affordable houses are being built, as builders have focused on larger, more expensive homes.

According to the website Businessinsider.com, only about 40% of American households make enough money to handle the average mortgage on a new house (if you use the 25% ratio explained above). This number could be higher if wages had not stagnated and/or if smaller houses, with smaller price tags, were being constructed.

How are contrasts used in Charles Dickens's A Tale of Two Cities to convey the theme of morality?

Contrasts are presented from the very first paragraph. Dickens gives several pairs of opposites (including “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times”), showing the conflicts of the age. This sets up the theme of goodness versus evil, often shown through various symbols. The two titular cities, London and Paris, are also shown to be opposites, even moral opposites. In London live the people who strive to do the right thing. In Paris are the revolutionaries and the nobility, both of whom are corrupt and violent. Light and shadow are common motifs, one example being the description of the street where the Manettes live. It is a shadowed street except for a bright spot where Doctor Manette and Lucie live (Book Two, Chapter Six). Even the characters of Charles Darnay and Sydney Carton are shown to be moral contrasts. Charles is good and noble, while Sydney is dissolute and unmotivated. In the end, however, Sydney brings together the light and the dark, the good and the evil, in his self-sacrifice. His redemption brings justification to himself, if not to the times in which he lives. His quotation from the Bible, “I am the Resurrection and the Life” (John 11:25), reflects this redemption. He has been “recalled to life,” the phrase used concerning Doctor Manette on his release from the Bastille (Book One, Chapter Two). No darkness is so complete that it cannot be redeemed. This is the moral message Dickens gives throughout the novel.

Imagine the world economy is made up of two economies, a small home economy and a large foreign economy. What would be the effect on the home...

Because the home economy is small relative to the foreign economy, we can safely assume that changes at home will not significantly affect the state of the foreign market. This is called a "small open economy" model.

If foreign income increases, its demand for goods will increase, and this includes goods that are imported from the home economy. Therefore demand for home goods will increase, resulting in money flows from outside.

These money flows will increase demand for our currency, which since the exchange rate is floating will rise in value. This will reduce money flowing in as exports and increase money flowing out as imports. When equilibrium is reached, both exports and imports should have increased, increasing our GDP but not changing our balance of trade.

An increase in the foreign money supply will cause inflation in the foreign economy, and also increase money flows into the home economy. Between both the increased exports and the foreign inflation, the home currency will have even more pressure to increase in value. But since the exchange rate is fixed, this can't happen. So the currency will remain undervalued.

Instead, the home economy will begin accumulating foreign reserves, and will begin to experience a trade surplus and a current account surplus. This will make the home balance sheet stronger, which may seem desirable (some economists think it is desirable in some cases), but carries four large downsides:

First, it pulls reserves from other countries, who may not be able to sustain their current account deficits indefinitely. If their deficit collapses, so must our surplus.

Second, it can trigger inflation in the local economy, which monetary policy may be insufficient to control.

Third, it means exchanging real goods for nothing more than paper, gradually reducing the real wealth of the home country.

Fourth, it introduces inefficiencies into the global trade system that reduce wealth for everyone, similar to a tariff or quota.

What are the strengths and weaknesses of parliamentary and presidential forms of government? Please explain using the U.K and the U.S.A. as...

Most representative democracies come in one of two types: A presidential system such as the USA, in which there is an executive who is directly elected, and a parliamentary system such as the UK, in which the legislature is elected and then the legislature chooses the executive. Some countries have hybrid systems (such as France), and other systems are possible (the executive could be folded fully into the legislature, made a council of several people, etc.), but these are by far the most common.

A presidential system like the US is inherently more democratic; any time you can pass the power directly to the people instead of making it through some intermediary you make the system more democratic. But "more democratic" does not necessarily mean "better"; many political scientists argue that it is possible to have too much democracy, and end up electing demagogues and enacting awful policies by rallying the opinion of an ignorant public.

A parliamentary system can be a means of weakening the tyranny of the majority, the possibility that a democratic vote could lead a majority of the population to violate the rights of a minority of the population. With a parliamentary system, there is more coalition-building within the parliament necessary to achieve executive power, mitigating the effects of simply having a majority in favor of a harmful policy.

Parliamentary systems generally avoid partisan gridlock, where one party controls the executive and an opposing party controls the legislature, and neither is willing to do anything because it would mean supporting the opposing agenda. (This has clearly been a major issue lately in the US, whereas it rarely happens in the UK.) On the other hand, parliamentary systems remove a check and balance---the executive and legislative branches are now more closely tied, and the two cannot as easily act as checks on one another as they could in a presidential system. So again it depends on whether we would rather have government that does things the people might not agree with, or one that doesn't do anything at all.

There is also empirical evidence suggesting that parliamentary systems may be more stable against coups and transitions to authoritarianism, particularly in countries with high levels of ethnic, religious, or cultural fractionalization. Third World countries that used parliamentary systems have had much more success transitioning to democracy than those that used presidential systems. This could be for many reasons, but all other things equal, it does argue in favor of a parliamentary system.

Some parliamentary systems allow the parliament to schedule elections more or less when they please (within certain constraints), whereas presidential systems almost always have a well-defined election schedule such as holding an election every four years. This can allow the ruling party to partially control the election outcome by manipulating the calendar, holding votes only when their poll numbers are favorable. On the other hand, it avoids the inconvenience of overly frequent elections and allows new elections to be held if a prime minister is incapacitated (whereas in a presidential system there usually has to be a vice president or some similar mechanism for automatic succession).

What is Pahom's sister's name?

There is no mention of Pahom’s sister in the story. Pahom’s wife had an elder sister, who visited them in the countryside. Pahom’s wife and her elder sister were also not mentioned by their names. The elder sister boasted about the advantages of town life. She talked about how luxurious her life was and the good things they enjoyed in the city. Pahom’s wife defended her lifestyle by stating the advantages of living in the countryside. She claimed that life in the countryside was better compared to life in the city. She stated that life in town was filled with anxiety and temptation. Pahom supported his wife and claimed that access to more land was the only challenge for a peasant. He added that if they had enough land, he would not fear the devil. Unfortunately, the devil heard him boasting and embarked on a mission to destroy him.

How might the pigs' appearance at the end of the novel be symbolic?

In Chapter 10, Napoleon walks around Animal Farm carrying a whip and wearing a black coat, ratcatcher breeches, and leather leggings. Napoleon's appearance is symbolic of his tyrannical rule and represents his proximity to the animal's original oppressor, Mr. Jones. The fact that Napoleon is wearing Mr. Jones' old clothes symbolically represents the way in which Napoleon treats the animals the same way Mr. Jones once did. Napoleon's whip is also a symbol of oppression and violence. Similar to Joseph Stalin's political purges, Napoleon violently executes animals who present a challenge to his authority. Napoleon's black coat, ratcatcher breeches, and leather leggings are symbolic of his social status. In Victorian England, ratcatcher attire was worn by aristocrats who participated in fox hunts. Napoleon and the other pigs occupy the upper class and are part of the aristocracy on Animal Farm. Napoleon does not consider himself equal to the other animals and is essentially a megalomaniac who takes advantage of the socially lower ranked animals on the farm.

What social trends does Ray Bradbury observe and see as potential problems for society?

Based on Fahrenheit 451, Bradbury observes the increasing power of government is a societal problem. The government in the book cracks down on any dissent, or disagreement, and tries to prevent people from thinking about what their leaders are doing by encouraging people to immerse themselves in constant mindless entertainment, such as watching TV on all their walls. The government also bans books because reading might make people think. Bradbury identifies the mindlessness of modern society as a problem that can cause people to submit to dictatorial governments. In the society in Fahrenheit 451, firefighters burn books to ensure no one reads. It's a society in which everyone must conform to mindless activities or be killed summarily. People like Clarisse who are non-conformists are quickly eliminated. In the end, this society self-destructs when atomic bombs are dropped on it, and Bradbury suggests a new and more aware society might take its place. 

In which rhyme scheme is "Woman's Constancy" by John Donne written?

The rhyme scheme in John Donne's "Woman's Constancy" changes in the middle of the poem. The first two couplets rhyme (the lines ending with "day" and "say" and "vow and "now"). The rhyme scheme of the first four lines is a/a/b/b. The scheme then changes with the line that begins "We are not." There are no rhymes for the next six lines, so the rhyme scheme is c/d/e/f/g/h. Then, the line ending in "justify" (line 11) rhymes with line line 8, which ends with "untie," so this line can also be classified as "f." Starting in line 12, which begins with "For having," the poem returns to rhyming couplets, which end with "you," "true," "could," "would," "do," and "too." These last six lines have the rhyme scheme i/i/j/j/i/i, as "do" and "too" rhyme with "you" and "true." Therefore, the rhyme scheme for the whole poem is a/a/b/b/c/d/e/f/g/h/f/i/i/j/j/i/i. The disruption in the rhyme scheme is symbolic of the lovers' lack of constancy. 

What themes are in Act III, Scene 1, of Romeo and Juliet?

Pride and honor are two themes of this scene. Tybalt wishes to fight Romeo in order to salvage his family's honor, which he believes to have been impugned by Romeo's appearance at the Capulets' party the night before. His pride compels him to confront Romeo over this slight. When Romeo refuses to be baited by Tybalt's insults, Mercutio steps in to fight in his place as a result of Mercutio's own pride. He considers Romeo's refusal to defend himself as a "Dishonorable, vile submission." After Mercutio's death, Romeo feels his own "reputation [has been] stained / With Tybalt's slander" and fights him out of pride as well.

Justice is another theme of this scene. After Tybalt kills Mercutio, Romeo tells Tybalt, "Either thou or I, or both, must go with him," because someone must accompany his soul to heaven. Romeo thinks it is unfair that Mercutio, who had nothing to do with their quarrel, should be forced to die alone; it is only just that one or both of them die, too.  When the prince arrives, Benvolio argues that Tybalt's death at Romeo's hands was just because death would have been his punishment anyway for having killed Mercutio. In the interest of justice, then, the prince condemns Romeo to be banished, not killed.

What is the argument in The Semisovereign People by Schattsschneider?

In this book, written in 1960, Schattsschneider looks at the assumptions people have regarding the way a democracy works. He writes, "The unstated premise...is that the people really do decide what the government does on something like a day-to-day basis" (page 130). However, this definition of democracy ignores the role of the political parties and pressure groups in defining the scope and bias of the policies that are fought over in the public arena. 

The author defines the difference between party politics and pressure politics. In examining the differences, he states that party groups are large-scale organizations, while pressure groups are small-scale organizations. In looking at the scope and effect of pressure groups, he further suggests differentiating between private interests and public interests. He defines special interest groups as organized. He states that "the business or upper-class bias of the pressure system shows up everywhere" (page 31). For example, business people are four to five times more likely to write their representative in congress than are manual laborers (page 31). He concludes, "the pressure system has an upper-class bias" (page 32). People of lower socio-economic status (SES) are much less likely to take part in voluntary organizations that play a role in the pressure system.

As he writes, these data suggest that special interest groups are not a "universal form of political organization reflecting all interests" (page 34). Not everyone can take part in these groups because they're small by definition. Here is the crux of his argument: "The flaw in the pluralist heaven is that the heavenly chorus sings with a strong upper-crust accent" (page 35). This is the problem with a pluralist system--people of high SES are well represented in pressure groups, while other people are not. The idea that pressure politics reflects the interests of the entire community is false. However, public authorities play a role in moderating the power of the rich over the other members of society and do not merely allow more powerful pressure groups to win. 

75 ml of a solution of HNO3 (0.0125 M) are added to 130 ml of a solution of Be(OH)2 (0.0240 M). Calculate the ph of the final solution and the...

This is a classic acid/base chemistry question.  First let's find the total number of moles of protons and hydroxide ions that will be present in the reaction.  First, we multiply the molarity of HNO3 (nitric acid) by the volume:

(0.0125 moles / L) * 0.075 L = 0.0009375 moles of H+

Now let's do the same thing to find the moles of hydroxide (OH-) present.  Each mole of Be(OH)2 will produce 2 moles of OH- so we need to multiply by 2:

(0.0240 moles / L) * 0.130 L * 2 = 0.00624 moles of OH-

Since the H+ will react with OH- to produce H2O, we need to see which species in present in a greater amount.  There are more moles of hydroxide present than protons, so we can subtract the numbers to find out what the excess amount of hydroxide remaining is:

0.00624 - 0.0009375 = 0.0053025 moles of OH- remaining.

We can divide the moles of hydroxide by the total volume of solution present to find the concentration of hydroxide.  The total volume of the solution is 130 mL + 75 mL = 205 mL

0.0053025 moles / 205 mL = 0.0259 M

We can convert the molarity of hydroxide ions into a pOH value by taking the negative log of the concentration via the equation below:

pOH = -log[OH-] = -log(0.0259) = 1.59

Since pH + pOH = 14, that means that we subtract the pOH from 14 to find the pH:

pH = 14 - pOH = 14 - 1.59 = 12.41

So the pH of the solution is 12.41.  The amount of a 0.075 M solution of HCl needed to add to neutralize the hydroxide is calculated below:

0.0053025 moles * (1 L / 0.075 moles) = 0.0707 L = 70.7 mL

So 70.7 mL of HCl solution would be required to neutralize the resulting solution.