What did Ida Wells-Barnett hope to accomplish with the publication of A Red Record?

Ida Wells-Barnett published A Red Record: Tabulated Statistics and Alleged Causes of Lynching in the United States in 1895. She documented that, according to statistics kept by whites, during the previous 30 years, more than ten-thousand African-Americans had been lynched in the south. She wrote:

"The purpose of the pages which follow shall be to give the record which has been made, not by colored men, but that which is the result of compilations made by white men."

In other words, using statistics compiled by whites and reported in the Chicago Tribune, she reported on several African-Americans who had been lynched, and she noted the crimes they had been accused of. She also gave graphic details about their lynchings. In general, white authorities in the south did not punish people who carried out lynchings, and the perpetrators of the lynchings went free. She hoped to publicize the extent of lynching in the south and to persuade whites outside the south to support a campaign against this horrific practice.  

How does using a road as a symbol for his experiences affect the meaning of Martin Luther King, Jr.'s Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech?

In the speech Dr. King gave when accepting the 1964 Nobel Peace Prize, he said,

"The tortuous road which has led from Montgomery, Alabama to Oslo bears witness to this truth. This is a road over which millions of Negroes are traveling to find a new sense of dignity."

As he made the speech, events were still unfolding in the United States, including the relatively recent murder of civil rights activists in Mississippi. By using the symbol of the road, Dr. King emphasized the progress his movement had achieved while acknowledging the continued progress the movement had to make. The image of the road conveyed both of these ideas at the same time so that the audience could feel jubilant about events such as the successful 1955-1956 Montgomery bus boycott and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 while also understanding Dr. King and his movement were still committed to ongoing work on a campaign that had not yet achieved all its goals. The symbol of the road allowed Dr. King to be celebratory and urge his audience to support his continued work for civil rights. 

What were three important things stated in the Ordinance of Nullification?

One important thing the nullification ordinance says is that in 1828 and again in 1832 Congress passed tariffs that were supposed to collect revenue from foreign imports, but in reality had a different aim, namely the:

...protection of domestic manufactures and the giving of bounties to classes and individuals engaged in particular employments, at the expense and to the injury and oppression of other classes and individuals...

The nullifiers meant that the tariffs passed by Congress were intended to protect industry by placing duties on manufactured goods imported from other countries. This meant that Americans would be more likely to purchase American manufactured goods, which were produced almost exclusively in the Northeast, and would be cheaper than foreign goods. This was considered bad for Southern planters, mostly because it had a tendency to raise prices on the goods they purchased. 

A second point raised in the Ordinance was that by passing the tariffs, Congress had:

exceeded its just powers under the constitution, which confers on it no authority to afford such protection, and bath violated the true meaning and intent of the constitution, which provides for equality in imposing the burdens of taxation upon the several States and portions of the confederacy...

Here, they argued that Congress was required by the Constitution to distribute the burden of taxation equally, and that the burdens of protective tariffs were borne (if indirectly) disproportionately by the Southern states. So in passing a law so clearly benefiting the people of one region over another, they had violated the Constitution.

A third point, and the one with the most historical significance, was that in light of the alleged abuses of the tariffs, and of their supposed violation of the Constitution, South Carolina would "nullify" it, or simply refuse to allow it to be enforced within its borders:

[The tariffs] ...are null, void, and no law, nor binding upon this State, its officers or citizens; and all promises, contracts, and obligations, made or entered into, or to be made or entered into, with purpose to secure the duties imposed by said acts, and all judicial proceedings which shall be hereafter had in affirmance thereof, are and shall be held utterly null and void.

They went on to say that attempts to enforce the tariffs by force on the part of the federal government would lead South Carolinians to dissolve "their political connection with the people of other States." This threat got to the heart of the issue--South Carolina was denying the ability of the federal government to pass legislation like the tariffs, and they were asserting the right, which had been earlier explained by Vice President John C. Calhoun, to leave the Union if their right to do so was not respected. This began the Nullification Crisis of 1832-33.

Are dialects in the United States more or less uniform than in previous times?

According to an article in Time magazine published on September 13, 2011 by Erica Ho entitled "Y’all Talk Funny: Regional Accents May Be Getting Stronger, Expert Says," regional accents or dialects are getting more pronounced in the United States. The article cites William Labov, a professor of linguistics at the University of Pennsylvania, who says that regional dialects are getting stronger, possibly because of the political divides between red (conservative) and blue (liberal) states. Regional dialects have become identified with political divides. The boundary between red and blue states is also the divide between the Midland and Northern dialects, according to Labov. 

In addition, in an article published on the PBS website (the link is below), Carmen Fought, an associate professor of linguistics at Pitzer College in California, says that TV will not erase differences in the way we speak in the United States. She writes, "our language expresses who we are: our complex and simultaneous identities as individuals and members of society." Therefore, we imitate people we want to be like. Therefore, dialects express our identity, and the diversity of identities in the U.S. is growing, rather than shrinking, making our dialects less uniform over time. 

A force of 25 N acts on an area of 25 centimeters squared. What is the pressure produced?

Hello!

By the definition, pressure is a physical quantity equal to the force divided by the area on which this force acts. It is supposed in this definition that the force acts perpendicularly to the surface. Also it is supposed that the force is uniform over the area. If not, this formula defines average pressure.

So `P = F/A,` where `P` is the pressure, `F` is the force and `A` is the area. In our problem `F` and `A` are given, thus we only need to divide:

`P = (25 N)/(25 cm^2) = 1 N/(cm^2).`

Such a unit, `N/(cm^2),` is possible for pressure, but isn't standard. In Si, the standard unit for length is meter (m), therefore `m^2` is used for area. In these units the answer is `1*10^4 N/m^2,` because there are `100 cm` in `1 m,` so there are  `100*100 cm^2` in `1 m^2.`

What is a direct quote from Fahrenheit 451 that shows Montag's most dominant personality trait? How does this quote reveal an important personality...

In Part Two of the novel entitled "The Sieve and the Sand," Montag visits Faber to seek advice about comprehending the various texts that he has begun to read. When Faber asks Montag why he came here, Montag says,

"Nobody listens any more. I can't talk to the walls because they're yelling at me. I can't talk to my wife; she listens to the walls. I just want someone to hear what I have to say. And maybe if I talk long enough, it'll make sense. And I want you to teach me to understand what I read" (Bradbury 78).

Montag's quote depicts his most predominant personality trait which his ambitious drive to take control of his own life. Montag is ambitious about changing his present situation and seeks to learn about ways to break free from his meaningless existence. He realizes that what he is doing makes him an enemy of the state, but seeks Faber's literary advice nonetheless. Asking for Faber's help in understanding what he has read and searching for answers also portrays his curiosity. Montag wants to learn how to make sense of literature and the world around him. Montag's ambitious personality is significant to the novel because it is his unending drive to change his present situation that allows him to break from society and become a traveling intellectual. By the end of the novel, Montag gets his wish to be heard as he walks toward the devastated city in hopes of rebuilding a better society.

When was Orwell's 1984 written?

George Orwell published 1984 in 1949, meaning that, though the year 1984 is now in the past for contemporary readers, it represented the not-so-distant future for Orwell. As such, the year becomes the perfect period in which to set a dystopia with eerie similarities to totalitarian regimes of the twentieth century. For instance, many similarities could be drawn between the party of Big Brother and the recently defeated Nazis. Likewise, Orwell's vision can in many ways be seen as a commentary on established totalitarian regimes of his day, such as Stalin's Russia. Thus, Orwell is imagining a near-future in which the totalitarian regimes of the middle twentieth century have grown into all-powerful entities capable of totally dominating human life across the globe. It's a chilling vision, especially since its relatively contemporary setting makes it impossible to avoid drawing parallels between Orwell's dystopia and our own society.