Datasets:

fahdsoliman

/

lfqa_test_with_supports_v2

like 0

Camp is the idea that if you take some piece of art to the extreme, making it extra lively, theatrical, and exaggerated, right up past the point where it can't be taken seriously, then it becomes funny and appealing in a weird, ironic sort of way. Think of musicians like Liberace or Elton John - very talented performers who performed onstage in incredibly elaborate costumes. Their costumes were always too bright and bold to be considered daring fashion choices (like many pop stars would choose) - they were worn because they were silly, and that silliness was a part of their persona. Or the classic example of campy television - the Batman show that aired in the '60's. Batman stories were considered too gritty for television, so the show was exaggerated until it became a weird sort of action-comedy. The fights were filled with crazy music, sound effects, and animated "BLAM!"s, the heroes spouted silly puns and catchphrases while they investigated *actual freaking murders*, the villains were mostly incompetent and bumbling, and Batman's trademark utility belt was stuffed with hilarious gizmos for every situation like "Bat-Shark-Repellant." If you look at it simply as a Batman story, you'd say it was terribly written with the wrong tone. But if you look at it as a wacky, campy comedy, it hit the nail on the head and became incredibly popular - even affecting the tone of Batman comics for decades.

what is camp?

<P> Camp courses. <P> in the camp. <P> personnel from the camp.

The CO2 atmosphere is the least of your worries. Temperature on Venus is hot enough to melt lead, one day is 243 earth days, clouds made of sulphuric acid and a pressure 90 times greater than that on earth's surface. It would be hard to conceive of a single celled organism that could survive the conditions on Venus, let alone complex plant life.

since venus' atmosphere is mostly co_2, making it too hot for human life, what is preventing us from introducing high tolerance plant life to convert the co_2 into oxygen, to make it inhabitable?

<P> carbon dioxide would trap incoming solar radiation. Because the raised temperature would add greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, the two processes would augment each other. Carbon dioxide alone would not suffice to sustain a temperature above the freezing point of water, so a mixture of specialized greenhouse molecules might be manufactured. Venus Terraforming Venus requires two major changes; removing most of the planet's dense 9 MPa (1,300 psi) carbon dioxide atmosphere and reducing the planet's 450 °C (842 °F) surface temperature. These goals are closely interrelated, because Venus's extreme temperature is thought to be due to the greenhouse effect caused by its dense atmosphere. <P> A number of approaches to terraforming are reviewed by Martyn J. Fogg (1995) and by Geoffrey A. Landis (2011). Eliminating the dense carbon dioxide atmosphere The main problem with Venus today, from a terraformation standpoint, is the very thick carbon dioxide atmosphere. The ground level pressure of Venus is 9.2 MPa (1,330 psi). This also, through the greenhouse effect, causes the temperature on the surface to be several hundred degrees too warm for any known lifeforms. Basically, all approaches to the terraforming of Venus include somehow getting rid of practically all the carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Biological approaches The method proposed <P> organic molecules would quickly be converted to carbon dioxide again by the hot surface environment. Venus would not begin to cool down until after most of the carbon dioxide has already been removed. Although it is generally conceded that Venus could not be terraformed by introduction of photosynthetic biota alone, use of photosynthetic organisms to produce oxygen in the atmosphere continues to be a component of other proposed methods of terraforming. Capture in carbonates On Earth nearly all carbon is sequestered in the form of carbonate minerals or in different stages of the carbon cycle, while very little is present in

To understand Dasein, you have to understand the whole text it's featured in; Being and Time. When I was studying philosophy I used a website from time to time to help me understand things better, or to just get a laugh from time to time. That website is . Although you have to deal with broditude throughout, it does simplify things for the layman. Taken directly from the website, > think of 'Being’, the essential thing we’re trying to get at, like a Party, and think of 'to be’, the verb, as 'to rage’. Now, there are lots of people at this party - chairs, trees, pretty much everything that is. Where is this Party? In the world, which we’ll call the 'house’. And who do we know who rages the hardest? That’s right, fucking Bros, that’s who. They’re the Dasein at this party, the partiers who rage with awareness and understanding. Turns out, Dasein being is a lot like a Bro raging, and Dasein understanding Being is a lot like Bros understanding the Party.

martin heidegger's "dasein" concept

<P> which each of us is himself…we shall denote by the term “Dasein”" (Heidegger, trans. 1927/1962, p.27). "[Dasein is] that entity which in its Being has this very Being as an issue…" (Heidegger, trans. 1927/1962, p.68). Heidegger sought to use the concept of Dasein to uncover the primal nature of "Being" (Sein), agreeing with Nietzsche and Dilthey that Dasein is always a being engaged in the world: neither a subject, nor the objective world alone, but the coherence of Being-in-the-world. This ontological basis of Heidegger's work thus opposes the Cartesian "abstract agent" in favour of practical engagement with one's environment. Dasein is revealed <P> person, man, soul, spirit, or subject. Dasein, then, is not intended as a way of conducting a philosophical anthropology, but is rather understood by Heidegger to be the condition of possibility for anything like a philosophical anthropology. Dasein, according to Heidegger, is care. The world confronts Dasein with possibilities. It is not completely deterministic; Dasein has choices. But Dasein cannot choose not to face the possibilities presented by the world, including the inevitability of its own mortality. Heidegger in his existential analytic refers to this condition as being "thrown into the world", or "thrownness" (Geworfenheit). The need for Dasein to <P> through Being and Time. Some scholars disagree with this interpretation, however, arguing that for Heidegger "Dasein" denoted a structured awareness or an institutional "way of life". Others suggest that Heidegger's early insistence on the ontological priority of Dasein was muted in his post-war writings. Origin and inspiration Some have argued for an origin of Dasein in Chinese philosophy and Japanese philosophy: according to Tomonobu Imamichi, Heidegger's concept of Dasein was inspired—although Heidegger remained silent on this—by Okakura Kakuzo's concept of das-in-der-Welt-sein (being-in-the-worldness, worldliness) expressed in The Book of Tea to describe Zhuangzi's Taoist philosophy, which Imamichi's teacher had offered to Heidegger

It's not that big of a deal. Eight different committees from reputable research institutions have examined all the emails and none found any fraud or scientific misconduct. The people who hacked the emails selectively picked phrases from them to make them sound bad. For example, the sentence "The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t" was picked out by critics, but in context the scientist who wrote it was clearly referring only to short-term warming at some specific location and not about warming as a whole. Climategate was the climate change equivalent of the ACORN videos from 2008. Conservative groups got access to information they normally wouldn't have access to and didn't find any huge conspiracies, yet still selectively released information to drum up media interest and paint a biased picture. Edit: I should say that I haven't read the emails and it's entirely possible the scientists quoted in them were doing some sneakier things to make the data look like it fit better with their hypotheses. I don't think that's what happened, but even assuming it is, their hypotheses were much more limited than just "climate change is happening."

climategate

<P> and that they "will look into it in detail". He later clarified that the IPCC would review the incident to identify lessons to be learned and rejected suggestions that the IPCC itself should carry out an investigation. In a series of emails sent through a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) listserv, apparently forwarded outside the group by an unknown person, scientists discussing the "Climategate" fallout considered launching advertising campaigns, widening their public presence, pushing the NAS to take a more active role in explaining climate science and creating a nonprofit to serve as a voice for the scientific community. A paper by <P> in the United States is picking up on the (University of East Anglia) emails. It's too inside baseball." The Christian Science Monitor, in an article titled "Climate scientists exonerated in 'climategate' but public trust damaged", stated: "While public opinion had steadily moved away from belief in man-made global warming before the leaked CRU emails, that trend has only accelerated." Paul Krugman, columnist for The New York Times, argued that this, along with all other incidents that called into question the scientific consensus on climate change, was "a fraud concocted by opponents of climate action, then bought into by many in the <P> F. Hayward wrote that "Climategate did for the global warming controversy what the Pentagon Papers did for the Vietnam war 40 years ago: It changed the narrative decisively." An editorial in Nature said that many in the media "were led by the nose, by those with a clear agenda, to a sizzling scandal that steadily defused as the true facts and context were made clear". Further release, 2011 On 22 November 2011, a second set of approximately 5,000 emails, apparently hacked from University of East Anglia servers at the same time as those in the 2009 release, was posted on

Here's an answer in the style of Vicky Pollard... Archaic Greek heavy infantry could well be described as "heavy skirmishers". Warriors are often shown carrying two spears, which must either both be javelins or include one javelin and one thrusting spear. In addition, even heavily armoured warriors are sometimes shown wielding a bow. In the relatively fluid fighting style of this time, neither heavy nor light infantry was separately marshalled, and ranged and close combat would have gone on between loosely organised battle lines simultaneously. However, the heavy infantry type that the Greeks seem to settle on at the end of this period was a creature dedicated to close combat. He was armed only with a thrusting spear and sword; he carried a heavy double-grip shield and took his place in a large homogenous formation that was meant to charge directly at the enemy and decide the battle by hand-to-hand fighting. There are a couple of reasons why this shift occurred. Part of it must be the fact that a swift charge into melee prevented missile combat from having much of an effect before the proximity of the enemy forced both sides to focus on their immediate self-defence. This was key to the Greek victory over the Persians. Of course, in any combat situation other than pitched battle, the hoplite was vulnerable because of his specialisation, but he still had his uses as a brute force weapon that could really only be stopped by men who fought in a similar way. Another part, though, was that this fighting style acted as a great equaliser between the upper classes and the common man. Only those with the leisure to train could become good heavy skirmishers; these men had formed the core of Archaic armies, fighting as small bands of heavily armoured warriors who had the skill to use many different kinds of weapon. But towards the end of the Archaic period, more and more Greeks began to arm themselves as heavy infantry, and this broader section of the population could not afford to take the time out to master the art of skirmishing warfare. The resulting heavy infantry formation was therefore adjusted to the lowest common denominator. While it took time and effort to master the use of the javelin, the bow, or the sling, the Greeks believed any idiot could pick up a spear and shield and give a decent account of himself in close combat. This illusion was shattered in the face of more professional troops (like mercenaries), but such troops were rare on Greek battlefields, and the large untrained citizen levies of Greek city-states could probably not be more effective in battle than as a mass of angry men running at the enemy to stab him in the face. They therefore adopted a fighting style that relied more on raw courage than skill. This is confirmed by the fact that the mass of Greek citizens who could not afford heavy armour, and were therefore forced to fight as light infantry, rarely achieved very much in battle. These people were not trained in the use of their haphazard weaponry, and could only really shine in very particular circumstances. The very effective light-armed that we hear about in the sources were often relatively small bands of specialist mercenaries, hired for the unique skills that their regional fighting styles had taught them. These specialists left the close combat to the hoplites; they themselves practised a fighting style that focused on avoiding the hand-to-hand encounter altogether. As long as both hoplites and specialist light infantry were present, and the hoplites were mainly expected to engage in melee, there was not much incentive for either hoplites to develop ranged combat skills or for light infantry to increase their staying power. There were various ways for these troop types to work together. Rather than reequipping some hoplites as archers, they could, for instance, station archers and other missile troops within a hollow square of hoplites, which allowed the two troop types to combine their strengths. The Greeks also realised that the best defence against light infantry was simply to field cavalry forces. Hoplites were never supposed to fight alone; whenever they did, it was because someone had fucked up. Any lightly armed skirmishing force would think twice about attacking a hoplite formation if any horsemen were about, as they could ride down the light infantry with impunity. In short, the tactical system developed by the Greeks in the Classical period relied on the combination of different units with different roles. They were intended to work together in varying ways depending on the situation they were in. There was therefore no need to develop a sort of "universal warrior" who could face any conceivable threat, and if this warrior would reduce the effectiveness of hoplites in melee (since his weapons would make him unsuitable for it), he would actually harm rather than enhance the fighting methods of the Greeks. All that said, the armies of the Hellenistic kingdoms *did* develop heavy skirmishers of various kinds to form a link between their even more specialised heavy infantry (the pikemen) and the light troops and cavalry that guarded the flanks of the phalanx. This is *probably* the nature of the Macedonian *hypaspistai* ("shield bearers") as well as the new infantry type called *thureophoroi* (after the Celtic shield type known as the *thureos*) that spread through the Greek world in the 3rd century BC. And of course Roman legionaries, with their throwing spears, are effectively heavy skirmishers until they engage in close combat.

in the ancient world, were heavy "skirmishers" ever used as a viable counter to light infantry?

<P> obsolescence of such heavy troops, all infantry has become indistinguishable from skirmishers, and the term has effectively lost its original military meaning as a distinct class of soldier, although skirmishing as a combat role is commonplace. Ancient and Post-classical history In ancient warfare, skirmishers typically carried bows, javelins, slings, and sometimes light shields. Acting as light infantry with their light arms and minimal armour, they could run ahead of the main battle line, release a volley of arrows, sling stones, or javelins, and retreat behind their main battle line before the clash of the opposing main forces. The aims of <P> the Punic Wars, despite the Roman and Carthaginian armies' different organisations, skirmishers had the same role in both: to screen the main armies. The Roman legions of this period had a specialised infantry class called Velites that acted as skirmish troops, engaging the enemy before the Roman heavy infantry made contact, while the Carthaginians recruited their skirmishers from native peoples across the Carthaginian Empire. The Roman army of the late republican and early imperial periods frequently recruited foreign auxiliary troops to act as skirmishers to supplement the citizen Legions. The medieval skirmishers were generally armed with crossbows or longbows wielded largely by <P> Battle of Plataea of 479 BC, mentions that the Spartans fielded 35,000 lightly armed helots to 5,000 hoplites yet there is no mention of them in his account of the fighting. Often Greek historians ignored them altogether, though Xenophon distinguished them explicitly from the statary troops. It was far cheaper to equip oneself as lightly armed as opposed to a fully armed hoplite – indeed it was not uncommon for the lightly armed to go into battle equipped with stones. Hence the low status of skirmishers reflected the low status of the poorer sections of society who made up skirmishers.

This is pure conjecture, but perhaps it is a relic of past times when the value of a coin was tied to the value of the metal used to make it. Gold is the most valuable, so you could have a $5, $10, $20, etc coin, with the value determined by how much gold is in it. Silver is less valuable, and in the US, quarters were silver until 1965. For the smaller denominations, nickel or copper are used, these being metals of even lesser value. I would imagine a couple hundred years ago when the US and Canada started making their coins, the amount and type of metal used to make a coin of a certain value would have been similar, so the size, shape and color of each coin is the same. Now that it's all fiat money anyway, all the coins are made with less valuable materials, but the basic design of each coin has remained the same.

why are the united states' coins and canada's coins basically the same size, shape, and color? what happened that the two countries decided this would be a good idea?

<P> equal to those of U.S. coins, though this was not always the case. They have a different metallic composition and most of them are thinner, and thus weigh slightly less, than the analogous U.S. coins. The U.S. penny settled on its current size in 1857, whereas the Canadian penny was much larger (25.4 mm (1.00 in)) until 1920. Because they are easily mistaken for each other and the difference in their official value is generally small, modest quantities of U.S. and Canadian coins circulate at par in the other country, particularly near their shared border. Their differing physical characteristics prevent them from <P> of British North America started issuing their own coins denominated in cents, featuring the likeness of Queen Victoria on the obverse. These replaced the sterling coins previously in circulation. The Province of Canada was the first to issue decimal coins. They were based on the value of the American dollar, due to an influx of American silver. Denominations issued were 1¢, 5¢, 10¢, and 20¢. The 1¢ coin was issued again in 1859, but it was very unpopular due to its extremely light weight. The coins had to be discounted by around 20% to get them into circulation. Other <P> being accepted interchangeably by most coin-operated machines. There was formerly some correspondence between the size of Canadian coins and British coins of similar value. For example, the large Canadian penny was identical in size and value to the contemporary British half-penny, which was 25.4 mm (1.00 in) in the Edward VII version, and slightly larger during Victoria's reign. Likewise, the Canadian quarter (23.81 mm diameter) was virtually identical in size and value to the British shilling – worth 12 British pence or about 24 Canadian cents, with a 24-millimetre (¹⁵⁄₁₆ in) diameter. The Canadian 5¢ coins, until the larger nickel coins of 1922, were 15 mm

Anonymity is a very powerful promoter of bad behavior, but it is not the only one. Two things that help promote good behavior is consequences and our natural empathy. On facebook there are somewhat limited consequences, especially when interacting with strangers. Tom Jones from Hawaii may be able to see that you are Cindy Feldman from Florida, but there may not be any meaningful way that he can retaliate against you being a jerk with that information. To the second point, when you interact face to face there are powerful factors that are at play in most people. Seeing actual other people in pain and suffering can cause mirrored emotions ourselves. This natural empathy is short circuited not by our own anonymity, but by the anonymity of our victim. They are a random avatar on the computer screen, not a breathing person whose mom is in the hospital, whose face is twisting in pain at an insult, who just stopped to help us jump our car, etc. Faceboom turns the wold into a giant game of Sims where others are just AI that we can interact with.

why do people tend to behave more poorly on facebook despite a complete lack of anonymity?

<P> not realize that restricting access to their data does not sufficiently address the risks resulting from the amount, quality and persistence of data they provide. Facebook users in our study report familiarity and use of privacy settings, they are still accepting people as "friends" that they have only heard of through other or do not know at all and, therefore, most have very large groups of "friends" that have access to widely uploaded information such as full names, birthdates, hometowns, and many pictures. This study suggests that social network privacy does not merely exist within the realm of privacy <P> concerns. An article titled "Facebook and Online Privacy: Attitudes, Behaviors, and Unintended Consequences" examines the awareness that Facebook users have on privacy issues. This study shows that the gratifications of using Facebook tend to outweigh the perceived threats to privacy. The most common strategy for privacy protection—decreasing profile visibility through restricting access to friends—is also a very weak mechanism; a quick fix rather than a systematic approach to protecting privacy. This study suggests that more education about privacy on Facebook would be beneficial to the majority of the Facebook user population. The study also offers the perspective that most users do <P> that "60% of teenage Facebook users have private profiles.” This proves that privacy is definitely something that people still wish to obtain. A person's life becomes much more public because of social networking. Social media sites have allowed people to connect with many more people than with just in person interactions. People can connect with users from all across the world that they may never have the chance to meet in person. This can have positive effects; however, this also raises many concerns about privacy. Information can be posted about a person that they do not want getting out. In the

Very frequently it is completely marketing, with little to no research backing up the claims. "Superfood" is not a regulated term, so anyone can slap it on their product, and anyone can write a blog post claiming that anything is a superfood. That said, dietary research *is* an active science, and new discoveries are frequently made. Many are not obvious; yes, "vitamin C is good for you" is an easy one, but other chemicals have more complex pathways and are formed from different chemicals your food gives you. For instance, new research shows that chicken eggs are excellent at helping your body produce chemicals used to develop the brain; this was not obvious previously, even though we knew a lot about the chemical makeup of eggs. Be wary of the term "superfood" when you see it in the world, but know that it isn't always snake oil. Don't accept health-based claims without supporting research-based evidence.

who decides what the next "superfood" is? how did we not already know something is good for us? is it just a marketing ploy to get rid of old stock?

<P> Superfood Superfood is a marketing term for food assumed to confer health benefits resulting from an exceptional nutrient density. The term is not commonly used by experts, dietitians and nutrition scientists, many of whom dispute that particular foods have the health benefits claimed by their advocates. Even without scientific evidence of exceptional nutrient content, many new, exotic, and foreign fruits or "ancient" grains are marketed under the term – or the related term, superfruit or supergrain – after being introduced or re-introduced to Western markets. In 2007, the marketing of products as "superfoods" was prohibited in the European Union unless accompanied <P> and self-help books about fad diets, promising an enhancement to health. "Superfood" products were sold at a higher price than similar foods not marketed with the label. The purported health benefits and effects of foods described as superfoods are unsupported or disputed by scientific studies. As of 2007, the marketing of products as superfoods was prohibited in the European Union unless accompanied by a specific authorized health claim supported by credible scientific research. The ruling was a marketing guide issued to manufacturers to assure scientific proof or evidence why a food would be labeled as extra healthy or classified as a <P> by a specific authorized health claim supported by credible scientific research. Definition and use of the term The term has no official definition by regulatory authorities in major consumer markets, such as the United States Food and Drug Administration and Department of Agriculture or the European Food Safety Authority. It appears to have been first used in a Canadian newspaper in 1949 when referring to the supposed nutritional qualities of a muffin. In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, the term "superfood" was used as a marketing tool for selling specific foods, dietary supplements, foods with selected food additives,

Before I write stuff for this, can you maybe give a bit of background on how much you know about atomic orbitals themselves?

orbital molecular theory

<P> compounds, so-called four-center two-electron bonds also have been postulated. Quantum mechanical description After the development of quantum mechanics, two basic theories were proposed to provide a quantum description of chemical bonding: valence bond (VB) theory and molecular orbital (MO) theory. A more recent quantum description is given in terms of atomic contributions to the electronic density of states. Comparison of VB and MO theories The two theories represent two ways to build up the electron configuration of the molecule. For valence bond theory, the atomic hybrid orbitals are filled with electrons first to produce a fully bonded valence configuration, followed <P> overestimates it. Modern calculations in quantum chemistry usually start from (but ultimately go far beyond) a molecular orbital rather than a valence bond approach, not because of any intrinsic superiority in the former but rather because the MO approach is more readily adapted to numerical computations. Molecular orbitals are orthogonal, which significantly increases feasibility and speed of computer calculations compared to nonorthogonal valence bond orbitals. However, better valence bond programs are now available. <P> by performing a linear combination of contributing structures (resonance) if there are several of them. In contrast, for molecular orbital theory a linear combination of atomic orbitals is performed first, followed by filling of the resulting molecular orbitals with electrons. The two approaches are regarded as complementary, and each provides its own insights into the problem of chemical bonding. As valence bond theory builds the molecular wavefunction out of localized bonds, it is more suited for the calculation of bond energies and the understanding of reaction mechanisms. As molecular orbital theory builds the molecular wavefunction out of delocalized orbitals, it is

Rutherford was influenced by Prout's hypothesis that all atoms were made up of groups of hydrogen atoms, with the hydrogen atom being the fundamental particle. The logic was that the atomic weights known at the time were almost exactly integer multiples of the mass of hydrogen. If there were smaller particles, there would be smaller elements or elements with masses that fell in between multiples of hydrogen. Obviously Rutherford discovered that an atom wasn't just one particle but a positive nucleus surrounded by negative electrons, and then when he observed the process of nitrogen atoms releasing hydrogen atoms when bombarded by alpha particles he took this as evidence that the hydrogen nucleus is indeed the fundamental building block for all other nuclei. This was before the neutron was discovered, it was believed that the nucleus was only made of positive charges. Of course, protons are actually made up of quarks with fractional charges but there was no way to know that at the time.

how did ernest rutherford know that the the positively charged particles in a nucleus were equal in magnitude of charge to electrons?

<P> not be identified with a single particle, unlike the negative electrons discovered by J. J. Thomson. Wilhelm Wien in 1898 identified the hydrogen ion as particle with highest charge-to-mass ratio in ionized gases. Following the discovery of the atomic nucleus by Ernest Rutherford in 1911, Antonius van den Broek proposed that the place of each element in the periodic table (its atomic number) is equal to its nuclear charge. This was confirmed experimentally by Henry Moseley in 1913 using X-ray spectra. In 1917 (in experiments reported in 1919 and 1925), Rutherford proved that the hydrogen nucleus is present in other nuclei, a <P> they would behave exactly like the cathode rays. — J. J. Thomson Thomson imagined the atom as being made up of these corpuscles orbiting in a sea of positive charge; this was his plum pudding model. This model was later proved incorrect when his student Ernest Rutherford showed that the positive charge is concentrated in the nucleus of the atom. Other work In 1905, Thomson discovered the natural radioactivity of potassium. In 1906, Thomson demonstrated that hydrogen had only a single electron per atom. Previous theories allowed various numbers of electrons. Posthumous honours In 1991, the thomson (symbol: Th) was proposed as a unit <P> fundamental units was more than 1,000 times smaller than an atom, suggesting the subatomic particle now known as the electron. Thomson discovered this through his explorations on the properties of cathode rays. Thomson made his suggestion on 30 April 1897 following his discovery that cathode rays (at the time known as Lenard rays) could travel much further through air than expected for an atom-sized particle. He estimated the mass of cathode rays by measuring the heat generated when the rays hit a thermal junction and comparing this with the magnetic deflection of the rays. His experiments suggested not only that

Bismarck led the creation of a welfare state for a few main reasons: * Reduce social unrest, and prevent an uprising like the Paris Commune of 1871. Bismarck wanted to reduce worker support for the socialists, and also make sure that the working classes supported the German empire project (which realistically could have dissolved following massive unrest). * Encourage workers not to emigrate, as many were leaving for the eastern USA, which was industrializing as well * He combined protectionism with new welfare policies to foster German heavy industry, which many saw to be key to both economic and military success There had also been welfare policies in place (often dealing with some kind of healthcare or pensions) in some German states, like Saxony, prior to unification, and these had proved to be *not a bad thing.* The existing models formed the base of the welfare that was provided across the German empire.

what was otto von bismarck's motivation(s) for creating a welfare state in germany during the 1880s?

<P> success.... No other statesman of his standing had ever before shown the same great moderation and sound political sense of the possible and desirable.... Bismarck at least deserves full credit for having steered European politics through this dangerous transitional period without serious conflict between the great powers." Early legislation In domestic policy Bismarck pursued a conservative state-building strategy designed to make ordinary Germans—not just his own Junker elite—more loyal to throne and empire, implementing the modern welfare state in Germany in the 1880s. According to Kees van Kersbergen and Barbara Vis, his strategy was: granting social rights to enhance the integration <P> based on internal political and economic forces; they were not his response to external pressure. At first he promoted liberal goals of free trade commercial expansionism in order to maintain economic growth and social stability, as well as preserve the social and political power structure. However he changed, broke with the liberals, and adopted tariffs to win Catholic support and shore up his political base. Germany's imperialism in the 1880's derived less from strength and instead represented Bismarck's solution to unstable industrialization. Protectionism made for unity at a time when class conflict was rising. Wehler says the chancellor's ultimate <P> if he has been working all the time ever so faithfully and diligently. The usual help for the poor, however, leaves a lot to be desired, especially in large cities, where it is very much worse than in the country. Bismarck's idea was to implement welfare programs that were acceptable to conservatives without any socialistic aspects. He was dubious about laws protecting workers at the workplace, such as safe working conditions, limitation of work hours, and the regulation of women's and child labor. He believed that such regulation would force workers and employers to reduce work and production and thus harm

“Point blank” comes from the French “point blanc” or the “white point”, and represents a range where you don’t have to adjust your aim for gravity or other factors like wind and can just aim directly at the white center of a target to hit bullseye.

when the distance between the gun and the target is very small, why is it called 'point blank' range?

<P> point shooting. It is described in the following excerpt from US Army Field Manual FM 23-9: Aimed. When presented with a target, the soldier brings the rifle up to his shoulder and quickly fires a single shot. His firing eye looks through or just over the rear sight aperture. He uses the front sight post to aim at the target. Using this technique, a target at 25 meters or less may be accurately engaged in one second or less. Pointed. When presented with a target, the soldier keeps the rifle at his side and quickly fires a single shot or burst. He <P> as "sight-reliant shooting" or "sight shooting". The issue of using sight-reliant shooting, which relies on the use of the sights for aiming in close quarters combat situations, versus point shooting, which does not rely on the sights for aiming in close quarters combat situations, has been debated since as early as 1835. Basis for the use of aimed point shooting Aimed point shooting employs humans' innate ability to point accurately at targets in such a way that the shooter can use that ability to hit targets with a firearm. The following is from Chap. 2, Sect. II, US Army Field Manual 23-25, <P> Point shooting Point shooting—also known as target- or threat-focused shooting, instinctive aiming, instinctive firing, and instinctive shooting—is a method of shooting a firearm quickly and accurately that does not rely on the use of the sights in close quarter, life-threatening situations where there is the greatest chance of being killed. Close-quarters fighting makes it difficult to apply proper marksmanship techniques, which is why point shooting advocates a less sighting-based style of shooting. Point shooting is also a technique used by trained archers and marksmen to improve general accuracy when using a bow, firearm, or other ranged weapon. By developing a feel

Well, I'll tell you my experience. I graduated with a ChemE degree 3 years ago, and I am currently working with lithium ion battery technology. I spent 2 1/2 years in reasearch and development, which was much more chemistry focused than engineering, and have moved to a more process engineering position this year, which basically is looking over all of electrode manufacturing for the batteries. I feel like I was prepared for both jobs with a ChemE degree. If I had to summarize chemical engineering I would probably say: thermodynamics and design. Thermodynamics is the transfer of energy in all of it's forms, and design is basically familiarizing yourself with processing equipment and how to use it and trying to improve processes to increase yield/efficiency. I feel like the major is very flexible and can be used in many different areas. Oh, and it is difficult.

the job of a chemical engineer

<P> established. In 1924 the Institution of Chemical Engineers adopted the following definition: "A chemical engineer is a professional man experienced in the design, construction and operation of plant and works in which matter undergoes a change of state and composition." As can be seen from the later definition, the occupation is not limited to the chemical industry, but more generally the process industries, or other situations in which complex physical and/or chemical processes are to be managed. The UK journal The Chemical Engineer (began 1956) has a series of biographies available online entitled “Chemical Engineers who Changed the World”, Overview Historically, the chemical <P> with special dielectric, optical or spectroscopic properties for opto-electronic devices. Additionally, chemical engineering is often intertwined with biology and biomedical engineering. Many chemical engineers work on biological projects such as understanding biopolymers (proteins) and mapping the human genome. Employment and salaries According to a 2015 salary survey by the AIChE, the median annual salary for a chemical engineer was approximately $127,000. In the UK, the IChemE 2016 Salary Survey reported a median salary of approximately £57,000, with a starting salary for a graduate averaging £28,350. Chemical engineering in the USA is one of the engineering disciplines with the <P> engineer has been primarily concerned with process engineering, which can generally be divided into two complementary areas: chemical reaction engineering and separation processes. The modern discipline of chemical engineering, however, encompasses much more than just process engineering. Chemical engineers are now engaged in the development and production of a diverse range of products, as well as in commodity and specialty chemicals. These products include high-performance materials needed for aerospace, automotive, biomedical, electronic, environmental and military applications. Examples include ultra-strong fibers, fabrics, adhesives and composites for vehicles, bio-compatible materials for implants and prosthetics, gels for medical applications, pharmaceuticals, and films

It is possible, but it‘s not that easy like reforesting somewhere in Europe or Northern America. The problem with the soil in rainforests is, that it can‘t hold minerals and nutrients very well. They are easily washed away if there are no plants that can hold them. Even worse if the ground was used for massive agriculture. If the ground has alreay lost its properties it takes a long time, but the rainforest can spread again. If you act quick and instantly after it burned down starting to replant natural flora you have quite a good chance to save as much as possible, as the burning leaves a really rich coat on the ground. (This is also why Bolsonaro would love to plant something else there, the yield would be awesome, but after 2-3 years there is nothing left and its time to burn down the next square kilometers)

can the amazonian rainforest be “re-forested”? g7 want to give money for reforestation plan

<P> the World Bank. The National Environmental Fund (Fundo Nacional do Meio Ambiente—FNMA), in addition to budgetary funds, received US$20 million from the Inter-American Development Bank to finance the environmental activities of NGOs and small municipal governments. The Pilot Program for the Conservation of the Brazilian Rain Forests (Programa Piloto para a Proteção das Florestas Tropicais do Brasil—PPG-7) was supported by the world's seven richest countries (the so-called G-7) and the European Community, which allocated USD $258 million for projects in the Amazon and Atlantic Forest regions. The Global Environment Facility (GEF), created in 1990, set aside US$30 million for Brazil, <P> reais) per year would be required from international sources to compensate the forest developers and establish a highly organized framework to fully implement forest governance and monitoring, and the foundation of new protected forest areas in the Amazon for future sustainability. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as WWF have been active in the region, and WWF Brazil formed an alliance with eight other Brazilian NGOs who aimed to completely halt deforestation in the Amazon by 2015. However, deforestation continues; in 2019, the rate reached a four-year high. Under Jair Bolsonaro's government, elected to power in January 2019, policies surrounding deforestation have relaxed. <P> is a tribute to her courage to push against the tide of destruction and is a significant initiative from Brazil on climate change mitigation". Her land-use planning policies saved 250,000 km² of conservation areas—the equivalent of 75 percent of protected forests in the world. From August 2012 to July 2013, the rate of deforestation increased by 29% in the Amazônia Legal (Legal Amazon), and from 2013 to 2014, it rose by 358%. With Teixeira as Environment Minister, Brazil has also refused to sign the anti-deforestation pledge that aims to reduce deforestation by 2030, dealing a blow to the Climate Change summit

(Written for a 7 year old) A joke is a little bit of talk or writing that makes people laugh in a specific way. They aren’t laughing at the person who tells/wrote it, because she sounds weird or is making a silly face. With a joke, it’s the words themselves that make people laugh. Why do they laugh? This is a tricky question. Sometimes what is funny to one person is not funny to another. But most of the time, people laugh because the joke makes them imagine something in a surprising new way. Maybe a word is used to mean something that it usually does not. Or the joke might be a little story that you think will turn out one way— but it turns out some other way, and you have to quickly figure out why it happened like that. It’s like a little puzzle, and the listener gets a feeling of happiness when they figure it out. People usually only find a joke funny if they’ve never heard it before! So new ones are always being made. But since it isn’t easy to make up funny jokes, lots of people memorize ones they read or hear.

what is a joke, how do you classify a “joke”?

<P> Joke A joke is a display of humour in which words are used within a specific and well-defined narrative structure to make people laugh and is not meant to be taken seriously. It takes the form of a story, usually with dialogue, and ends in a punch line. It is in the punch line that the audience becomes aware that the story contains a second, conflicting meaning. This can be done using a pun or other word play such as irony or sarcasm, a logical incompatibility, nonsense, or other means. Linguist Robert Hetzron offers the definition: A joke is a <P> end. In the case of riddle jokes or one-liners the setting is implicitly understood, leaving only the dialogue and punchline to be verbalised. However, subverting these and other common guidelines can also be a source of humor—the shaggy dog story is in a class of its own as an anti-joke; although presenting as a joke, it contains a long drawn-out narrative of time, place and character, rambles through many pointless inclusions and finally fails to deliver a punchline. Jokes are a form of humour, but not all humour is a joke. Some humorous forms which are not verbal jokes <P> jokes. A verbal joke or cartoon is emailed to a friend or posted on a bulletin board; reactions include a replied email with a :-) or LOL, or a forward on to further recipients. Interaction is limited to the computer screen and for the most part solitary. While preserving the text of a joke, both context and variants are lost in internet joking; for the most part emailed jokes are passed along verbatim. The framing of the joke frequently occurs in the subject line: "RE: laugh for the day" or something similar. The forward of an email joke can increase

Because Portugal did not have the capacity nor the inclination to fight Japan. The Portuguese East Timor garrison consisted of an understrength colonial battalion of one colonial company, a very small militia force and a mounted border police unit, a grand total of 282 men with 4 light and 6 heavy machine guns and no artillery at all. East Timor had already been invaded, under local Portuguese protest, by Australian forces who recognised that the island could not be held by only defending the western (Dutch) part on the 17th of December 1941. When Japan invaded on the 19th of February 1942, there was a convoy heading for East Timor carrying two companies of Mozambique colonial troops and artillery, but this force was not allowed passage by the Japanese, and the Portuguese troops which had intended to replace the Austrialian and Dutch East Indees troops - a force of about 800 men with a battery of artillery had to turn around and head back for Portuguese Mozambique.

why did portugal not declare war on japan when japan invaded portuguese east timor in the 2nd world war

<P> Indonesian invasion of East Timor Background East Timor owes its territorial distinctiveness from the rest of Timor, and the Indonesian archipelago as a whole, to being colonised by the Portuguese, rather than the Dutch; an agreement dividing the island between the two powers was signed in 1915. Colonial rule was replaced by the Japanese during World War II, whose occupation spawned a resistance movement that resulted in the deaths of 60,000 people, 13 percent of the population at the time. Following the war, the Dutch East Indies secured its independence as the Republic of Indonesia and the Portuguese, meanwhile, re-established <P> East Timorese. The Japanese eventually drove the last of the Australian and Allied forces out. However, following the end of World War II and Japanese surrender, Portuguese control was reinstated. Following the 1974 Portuguese revolution, Portugal effectively abandoned its colony on Timor and civil war between East Timorese political parties broke out in 1975. The Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor (Fretilin) resisted a Timorese Democratic Union (UDT) coup attempt in August 1975, and unilaterally declared independence on 28 November 1975. Fearing a communist state within the Indonesian archipelago, the Indonesian military launched an invasion of East Timor in December 1975. <P> exports becoming significant in the mid-nineteenth century. As was often the case, Portuguese rule was generally neglectful but exploitative where it existed. At the beginning of the twentieth century, a faltering home economy prompted the Portuguese to extract greater wealth from its colonies, which was met with East Timorese resistance. During World War II, first the Allies and later the Japanese occupied Dili, and the mountainous interior became the scene of a guerrilla campaign, known as the Battle of Timor. Waged by East Timorese volunteers and Allied forces against the Japanese, the struggle resulted in the deaths of between 40,000 and 70,000

Well from what I can recall from my old high school religion teacher, Leviticus is basically 'the rule book' of the Old Testaments. It sets out the guidelines and the practices that all good Jews/Christians should follow in the belief that adherence to these principles will allow harmony to exist with God. They're harsh because you have to remember these were written thousands of years ago where tribal-based societies were predominate. Keeping control over your population was important, especially given the difficulties in day-to-day life. Make it harsh to act as a deterrent against disobedience. As for whether it applies today...well, like everything else in holy scriptures, it's mostly up to the individual. The Vatican has nulled some things like the dietary laws (hence why Christians don't eat Kosher) and you're not going to find anybody giving you grief over wearing a garment made up of two types of fabric. But you'll find plenty of people who still use it as a 'proof' that homosexuality is against God's will.

leviticus in the bible

<P> are instructions for peace offerings (5-8), food aid for poor people and foreigners (9-10), and various instructions relating to ethical treatment of others (11-18) and agricultural practices (19). The chapter penalises adulterous relations between a free man and a married female slave (20-22), and restricts the use of fruit from young trees (23-25). The chapter closes with a variety of other regulations on several subjects (26-36) and a general instruction to obey all of God's commands (37). The laws of Leviticus 19 are put in no obvious order, and as a result scholars tend to think that the chapter includes <P> Leviticus 19 Text The original text of Leviticus 19, like the rest of Leviticus, was written in Hebrew. Some of the more ancient Hebrew sources for this chapter, are the Masoretic Text, Dead Sea Scrolls, and Samaritan Pentateuch. There is also a Greek translation known as the Septuagint, from the 3rd century BC. Since the introduction of chapter divisions in the late medieval period, this chapter is divided into 37 verses. Synopsis The chapter begins with God giving Moses a message for the Israelites about the need to be holy, to respect parents, and to avoid idolatry (verses 1-4). Next <P> the house, or bought with money of any foreigner, that is not of thy seed. 13 He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised; and My covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. 14 And the uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken My covenant. Also, Leviticus 12:3 provides: "And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised." According to the Hebrew Bible, it was "a reproach"

Hi there, I was interested by your question so I did a little superficial research for you. First, yes the Allied forces did advance into the area where your ancestor's mill was located in April 1945. Check out this map and you can see in the Northeast, near Uelzen, was the limit of the Allied advance by April 19 1945. This other map also demonstrates how far the Allies got in April 1945, and then how far they went into May 1945. I did some quick web searches to answer your question. I found two interesting sites referring to fighting in the area you indicated on your map. One is this site, which has the Report on the Commitment of the Panzer-Division Clausewitz. I don't know if it's accurate, but using the information about that one Panzer Division, I made up a map demonstrating some of the battles that they recount taking place 14 April-18 April 1945. The red dot is roughly where your mill was located. So fighting was taking place in and around the area. Another document I found discusses European theatre of operations for the US Airforce in February 1945. If you do a ctrl-F for "bodenteich" you can find that on 14 February 1945 > 3. 375 B-24s are sent to hit an oil refinery at Magdeburg but are unable to attack due to weather; 340 hit the secondary, the marshalling yard at Magdeburg; targets of opportunity are Emlicheim (1), Meppen (1), **Bodenteich** (1) and other (1); 1 B-24 is lost, 2 damaged beyond repair and 16 damaged; 9 airmen are MIA. 253 of 273 P-51s escort; they claim 10-0-3 aircraft; 2 P-51s are lost (pilots MIA). Bodenteich, if you look at that map I made, is called Bad Bodenteich on it (between Uelzen and Wittingen). I think the names are interchangeable... So there was bombing in the area of the mill in 1945. Though not at the same time as troop action, large scale bombing offensives had been suspended as of 16 April, 1945. Still, it's possible your mill was bombed by inaccurate bombing (it was never really 'accurate' in any sense). This may be the source of your story, especially if there was bad weather north of Magdeburg as well that impeded even the illusion of accurate bombing. I also found this site telling the story of British Dragoons that also talks a bit about taking Bodenteich from the south (presumably around late April 1945). I unfortunately don't know why Bodenteich may have been a target. Nor do I know if fighting actually took place in the exact area you mark on the map. Also this is all from quick research, so I can't really say it's absolutely true, but I hope it's a good start.

question about the advance of allied troops in western germany during ww2

<P> Allied advance from Paris to the Rhine Background German forces had been routed during the Allied break-out from Normandy. The Allies advanced rapidly against an enemy that put up little resistance. But after the liberation of Paris in late August 1944, the Allies paused to re-group and organise before continuing their advance from Paris to the River Rhine. The pause allowed the Germans to solidify their lines—something they had been unable to do west of Paris. By the middle of September 1944, the three Western Allied army groups; the Anglo-Canadian 21st Army Group (Field Marshal Sir Bernard Montgomery) in the north, <P> should be launched against the German forces whilst they were still organizing their defences, and Comet was based on this principle; Allied forces under Montgomery's overal command would be able to move through the Netherlands over the river crossings captured by the airborne forces, outflank the Siegfried Line and enter the North German Plain, ultimately heading for Berlin. Battle of the Bulge With the ultimate failure of Operation Market-Garden, the Allied advance came to a halt to be replaced by several months of almost static combat against defending German forces, with no Allied airborne operations being planned or executed. This <P> Allied airborne operation to cross the River Rhine in support of the Anglo-Canadian 21st Army Group that would take place during March. By March 1945, the Allies had advanced into Germany and had reached the River Rhine. The Rhine was a formidable natural obstacle to the Allied advance, but if breached would allow the Allies to access the North German Plain and ultimately advance on Berlin and other major cities in Northern Germany. Following the 'Broad Front Approach' laid out by General Eisenhower, it was decided to attempt to breach the Rhine in several areas. British Field Marshal Sir Bernard Montgomery,

Until almost 200 years ago, Greece was part of the Ottoman empire. Before that, Greece was part of the byzantine empire, which was the last remnant of the Roman Empire. Before the Romans, Greece was part of the hellenic world, which was the territory of the successors of Alexander the great. Before that, western Turkey was settled by Greeks. So the connection between Greece and what's now the middle east goes back to the beginning of Greek history, and it's only been separated since its independence.

the cultural history and overlap of greek and middle eastern foods.

<P> oil: modern recipes from Kavala to Kastoria and Kozani offer lamb with quince, pork with celery or leeks. The arrival of Greek refugees from Asia Minor and Constantinople in the early 20th century brought also Anatolian and Constantinopolitan elements in the cuisine of the region. Some current specialties are trahanas with crackling, phyllo-based pies (cheese, leek, spinach) and meat plates (such as pork, wild boar and bubalus). Favourites are tyrokafteri (Macedonian spicy cheese spread) and soupies krasates (cuttlefishes in wine). Unlike Athens, the traditional pita bread for the popular souvlaki usually is not grilled but fried. (Information included from 'Greek Gastronomy', <P> Greek Macedonian cuisine Ancient and Byzantine periods The letters of Lynceus of Samos include reference to a Macedonian dish organized by Lamia of Athens for her lover Demetrius I Poliorcetes. Constants on menus across the centuries have been seafood and meats. At the wedding feast by Caranus referred to in Hippolochus's letter, around the 4th or 3rd century BC, grilled fish, eggs, oysters, orioles and a host of roasted delicacies were served. Ottoman and Modern periods A continuation from ancient days are dishes such as lamb cooked with quince or various vegetables and fruits, goat boiled or fried in olive <P> on spread to the rest of the population. Much of the cuisine of former Ottoman territories today is descended from a shared Ottoman cuisine, especially Turkish, and including Greek, Balkan, Armenian, and Middle Eastern cuisines. Many common dishes in the region, descendants of the once-common Ottoman cuisine, include yogurt, döner kebab/gyro/shawarma, cacık/tzatziki, ayran, pita bread, feta cheese, baklava, lahmacun, moussaka, yuvarlak, köfte/keftés/kofta, börek/boureki, rakı/rakia/tsipouro/tsikoudia, meze, dolma, sarma, rice pilaf, Turkish coffee, sujuk, kashk, keşkek, manti, lavash, kanafeh, and more. Science and technology Over the course of Ottoman history, the Ottomans managed to build a large collection of libraries complete with translations

Over the past 20 years Venezuela socialized their industry and began running the government very poorly. One instance is that they started setting rules on how much stores could charge for food so that everyone could afford it. The stores couldn't afford to sell anymore so they restricted how much the farmers could charge. Then the farmers could no longer make a living so Venezuela stopped producing much of their food. Fortunately for them, they had a lot of oil and it sold for a lot of money and the government could subsidize imports. Unfortunately, there is something called a resource curse in which governments get rich and corrupt at the expense of their people. When the price of oil dropped the country fell into turmoil but the government would not deal with the rampant corruption. Hugo Chavez, the president who made all these changes, died in 2013 and put vice president Maduro in charge. In the midst of these struggles he outlawed opponents and won the next election. Many of the people of Venezuela, many countries around the world, and most of the Western Hemisphere including the US believe the elections were fraudulent and are calling for Maduro to step down. Maduro has not taken this well and the country is getting worse. Aid trucks were sent in to help, but the convoy was blocked. During the ensuing riot the supplies were destroyed. It looks like one of the people protesting the government accidentally started it with a poorly thrown Molotov cocktail (the burning rag fell out of the bottle while being thrown), but that the situation could even exist shows there is a problem between the government and the people. The problem is that the industries are nationalized so whatever money goes in through exports like oil goes to him. His supporters will be supplied while the average people suffer. Edit: Additionally, Venezuela also appears to be working with Russia in making threats against the US. So, another part of Cold War II

why is the u.s. sanctioning venezuela?

<P> huge real exchange rate and other relative price misalignments, to maintain expensive fuel subsidies while monetizing a double-digit budget deficit, and to persecute the private sector for responding to relative price signals all contributed to making Venezuelans’ lives miserable under Maduro.” He has also said that “abundant evidence of serious human rights abuses during [2014] protests…merit an international investigation to determine the potential complicity of high-ranking members of government.” At the same time, Rodríguez is critical of economic sanctions on Venezuela, which he argues have not forced Maduro out but have contributed to deepening Venezuela's economic crisis.  In a 2018 article, he <P> Argenis Chávez Sanctions In November 2017, Canada sanctioned Chávez and other Venezuelan officials under the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act, stating: "These individuals are responsible for, or complicit in, gross violations of internationally recognized human rights, have committed acts of significant corruption, or both." <P> showed that the rate of decline of Venezuelan oil production accelerated rapidly after the imposition of financial sanctions by the United States. While cautioning that this observation could not be taken as “decisive proof that sanctions caused the output collapse” because of inherent difficulties in establishing causality using non-experimental data, he argued that the findings were “suggestive enough to indicate the need for extreme caution in the design of international policy initiatives that may further worsen the lot of Venezuelans.” In this regard, Rodríguez has proposed the creation of an oil-for-food program under UN auspices and under the supervision of the

You assume right. The (whole) island of Timor was first conquered and administered by Portuguese colonialists, from the 16th century onwards. They set up both commercial outposts and catholic missions. From the 17th century onwards, the Dutch came over and conquered nearly all of Indonesia, including Western Timor. However, they faced resistance from the Portuguese, and Topasses - native Timorians of Portuguese descent -, and Eastern Timor remained under Portuguese administration. Fast forward real quick to 1975. Portugal has just gotten rid of its dictatorship following a revolution, and its government decided to disengage from its remaining colonies in Asia. Independentists in Timor unilaterally declared independence, virtually unopposed **by the Portuguese Government** However, Indonesia attacked, occupied and annexed East Timor right off the bat, in 1976. Note that East Timor's government was left-leaning, and with the Cold War and all, the US & co. favored Indonesia in this war. :) Indonesian occupation was nightmarish from a Human Rights point of view, you got that right. UN mediation finally led to a solution to the crisis, and eventually East Timor became independent in 2002. Here is a recap I found on Google Books. TLDR : Shitty colonialism + shitty neighbour. **Disclaimer** - I'm no historian, nor remotely Timorese (?) - I just have too much time on my hands. Feel free to correct me.

how did east timor come to exist?

<P> Indonesian invasion of East Timor Background East Timor owes its territorial distinctiveness from the rest of Timor, and the Indonesian archipelago as a whole, to being colonised by the Portuguese, rather than the Dutch; an agreement dividing the island between the two powers was signed in 1915. Colonial rule was replaced by the Japanese during World War II, whose occupation spawned a resistance movement that resulted in the deaths of 60,000 people, 13 percent of the population at the time. Following the war, the Dutch East Indies secured its independence as the Republic of Indonesia and the Portuguese, meanwhile, re-established <P> East Timorese. The Japanese eventually drove the last of the Australian and Allied forces out. However, following the end of World War II and Japanese surrender, Portuguese control was reinstated. Following the 1974 Portuguese revolution, Portugal effectively abandoned its colony on Timor and civil war between East Timorese political parties broke out in 1975. The Revolutionary Front for an Independent East Timor (Fretilin) resisted a Timorese Democratic Union (UDT) coup attempt in August 1975, and unilaterally declared independence on 28 November 1975. Fearing a communist state within the Indonesian archipelago, the Indonesian military launched an invasion of East Timor in December 1975. <P> Indonesia declared East Timor its 27th province on 17 July 1976. The UN Security Council opposed the invasion and the territory's nominal status in the UN remained as "non-self-governing territory under Portuguese administration". Indonesian occupation (1975–1999) Indonesia's occupation of East Timor was marked by violence and brutality. A detailed statistical report prepared for the Commission for Reception, Truth and Reconciliation in East Timor cited a minimum bound of 102,800 conflict-related deaths in the period 1974–1999, namely, approximately 18,600 killings and 84,200 "excess" deaths from hunger and illness, with an estimated figure based on Portuguese, Indonesian and Catholic Church data

There stated goal is to stop the killing of unarmed black men in cities and the suburbs. Black lives matter thinks that there have been years of systematic oppression of black people by the police causing them to be unfairly arrested, profiled, and killed. They want to make sure that people stop dying and that police officers who kill people without cause go to jail.

what does the black lives matter movement actually want? what is it they want to accomplish?

<P> convening local and national groups to create a United Front". This year long process ultimately resulted in the establishment of an organizational platform that articulates the goals, demands, and policies which the Movement for Black Lives supports in order to achieve the "liberation" of black communities across America. Platform The organization's platform, entitled "A Vision for Black Lives: Policy Demands for Black Power, Freedom and Justice," has six "demands": 1) End the war on black people 2) Reparations 3) Invest-Divest 4) Economic justice 5) Community control, and 6) Political power. Each demand outlines the demands, the problem, the solution, and <P> for Black Lives' call for criminal justice reform and the end of police brutality resonated with many advocacy groups. In one statement, the National Council of Jewish Women stated, "NCJW affirms that Black lives matter, including Jews of color, who are a vital part of both the Jewish and our NCJW community. We recognize that the Black and Jewish communities are inextricably linked and our struggles for social justice are connected." The Movement for Black Lives received further support from "Democracy for America" following the release of its policy platform. One of the primary goals of the Movement for Black Lives <P> label used to describe a wide range of protests and conversations focused on racial inequality." Guiding principles According to the Black Lives Matter website, there are thirteen guiding principles that should apply to those who choose to become involved under the Black Lives Matter banner, among them Diversity, Globalism, Empathy, Restorative justice and Intergenerationality. Broader movement Concurrently, a broader movement involving several other organizations and activists emerged under the banner of "Black Lives Matter" as well. For example, BLM is a member organization of the Movement for Black Lives established to respond to sustained and increasingly visible violence against black

A few minutes of googling show me that the governor and legislature cannot agree on a budget. The governor vetoed the budget passed by the legislature. Schools get money from the state and if the state does not allocate money then they have none to spend. That is all that is comes down to. In this case you have a Democratic governor fighting with a Republican legislature. edit: Impact: schools shut down except in wealthy areas where local taxes can cover costs until everything is resolved. Those with the means will probably move children to a private school.

why did pennsylvania public schools lose funding and how would this impact the schools?

<P> goal of the state providing 50% of district funding. In December 2014, the Pennsylvania Education Funding Reform Commission conducted a hearing. Testimony was given regarding state funding at the fastest growing districts and those with the greatest decline in enrollment since 1996. The commission developed a new basic education funding formula which sets a new way to distribute state basic education dollars. It abolished the practice of "hold harmless" funding, which gave districts at least the same as they got the previous school year regardless of declining enrollment. The plan became law in June 2016 (House Bill 1552). For the 2017-18 school <P> its worst-performing schools. The funds were disbursed via a competitive grant program. The Pennsylvania Department of Education has identified 200 Pennsylvania schools as "persistently lowest-achieving," making them eligible for this special funding. Pennsylvania required low performing schools to apply or provide documentation about why they had not applied. The funds must be used, by the district, to turn around schools in one of four ways: school closure, restart – close the school and reopen it as a charter school. The other two options involve removing the principal. One would require at least half the faculty in a chronically poor performing <P> $544.4 million payment for School Employees’ Social Security and $856 million for School Employees’ Retirement fund called PSERS. This amount is a $21,823,000 increase (0.34%) over the 2011-12 appropriations for Basic Education Funding, School Employees' Social Security, Pupil Transportation, Nonpublic and Charter School Pupil Transportation. Since taking office, Corbett's first two budgets have restored more than $918 million in support of public schools, compensating for the $1 billion in federal stimulus dollars lost at the end of the 2010-11 school year. In 2011-12, Dover Area School District received $10,032,836 in state Basic Education Funding. Additionally, the district received $191,065 in Accountability

* Hong Kong used to be a British colony * Part of the agreement handing it back to China was universal suffrage - one-person, one-vote for city leader * China has said you can have this ... but we will pick the candidates. So it's not really democracy at all * The people trying to get signatures are actually pro-Beijing stooges, attempting to get people to pledge their support for the Beijing 'universal suffrage', to prove the 'city is behind the plan'

universal suffrage in hong kong

<P> for universal suffrage Since the handover of Hong Kong, constitutional reform remained the dominant political agenda and goal of the liberals. The Hong Kong Basic Law Article 45 promised that "the ultimate aim is the election of the Chief Executive (CE) by universal suffrage" while Article 68 stipulated that "the ultimate aim is the election of all members of the Legislative Council (LegCo) by universal suffrage". Pro-democratic politicians and activists demanded an early implementation of universal suffrage for the CE and LegCo elections from the beginning. The pro-democrats launched a protest on 1 July, the establishment day of the Special <P> held in Hong Kong larger than this one were the gatherings contemporarily supporting and commemorating the 1989 Tiananmen square protests, and the 2019 Hong Kong protests against the Hong Kong extradition bill. On 26 April, 2004, the National People's Congress Standing Committee (NPCSC) issued a verdict stating that the elections of the 2007 CE and 2008 LegCo will not be decided by universal suffrage, thereby defeating the democrats' appeal for universal suffrage by 2007-2008. The popularity of the liberal forces rebounded after the massive demonstration held on July 1st, 2003. In the 2004 Legislative Council election, the Article 23 Concern Group, having <P> government subsequently accepted the Democratic Party's modified proposals to allow ten new seats to be directly elected by Hong Kongers. The Democrats' move was seen as an "act of betrayal" by the radical pro-democrats. In the 2011 District Council election, the radical People Power movement split from the League of Social Democrats and ran against the established Democratic candidates in order to "punish" the Democratic Party for their overtures towards Beijing. The intensifying split between the moderates and radicals saw the re-emergence of localism in Hong Kong during the early 2010s. Umbrella Revolution and aftermath In 2013, legal scholar Benny

There was great article in WIRED a few months ago about it. I'm just learning about it myself and I found it very interesting: Found a 2nd article while looking for the original one online. Enjoy! Sorry I don't know much more that can help you. :)

america's cup sailing

<P> American Challenge: A Sailing Simulation Gameplay The game, portrayed through wireframe 3D graphics, sees the player race against the computer or another player via modem on eight courses. The player controls the sail, rudder and centerboard, while the screen equipment monitor the wind speed and direction. The boat responds realistically to the player's movements. The game is fashioned after the America's Cup. Players were able to verse players at other computer via a direct serial connection, and could verse themselves to beat their own time. Players can take the American Challenge by trying to beat the Australian team. Development The <P> runner up. The winner of the series earned two points and the runner-up received a single point in the new America's Cup Qualifiers. The boats are similar to the AC50 that will be used in the 2017 America's Cup. Cancelled 2018 and 2020 World Series Prior to the 2017 America's Cup, several of the competing syndicates signed an agreement to hold World Series prior to the next two America's Cups, then scheduled for 2019 and 2021. These two World Series would be used as selection series to determine which teams would compete at the 2019 and 2021 Louis Vuitton Cups <P> game was shipped with a cassette that featured a sailing tutorial on one side and a song named 'Win Back the Cup" on the other. There was a challenge whereby if a player was able to beat Australia in the program's Cup Race, they become eligible for a contest to win a trip to Australia to watch the 1987 America's Cup races. The game came packaged with a music record featuring a sailing tutorial on one side and an original song entitled ''Win Back the Cup'' on the other; The New York Times recommended players learn the ropes using the audio

He is the former Prime Minister of Italy, one of the richest and most powerful men in the world, and certainly in Italy.

who is silvio berlusconi, and why is his expulsion from the italian senate a big deal?

<P> 2026. The resignation also came at a difficult time for Berlusconi, as he was involved in numerous trials for corruption, fraud and sex offences. He was often found guilty in lower courts but is alleged to have used loopholes in Italy's legal system to evade incarceration. Berlusconi had also failed to meet some of his pre-election promises and had failed to prevent economic decline and introduce serious reforms. Many believed that the problems and doubts over Berlusconi's leadership and his coalition were one of the factors that contributed to market anxieties over an imminent Italian financial disaster, which could have a <P> 2016, with the coast to coast Constitution, he went on a motorcycle tour to promote the "No" to the referendum on the Renzi-Boschi constitutional reform. On 20 November 2017 he announced that he will not stand for re-election to the next parliamentary elections of 2018, but will remain in the 5 Star Movement. Battista accused Silvio Berlusconi of having ties with the Italian Mafia, leading to a corrupt system while he was in power, stating he has only made it more powerful. <P> potentially catastrophic effect on the 17-nation eurozone and the world economy. Many critics of Berlusconi accused him of using his power primarily to protect his own business ventures. Umberto Bossi, leader of the Northern League, a partner in Berlusconi's right-wing coalition, was quoted as informing reporters outside parliament, "We asked the prime minister to step aside." Announcement CNN reported on 7 November that Berlusconi had previously denied the rumors that he was going to resign and had stated on his Facebook page that "The rumors of my resignation are groundless." On 12 November 2011, after a final meeting with his

"Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could," wrote Abigail Adams in 1776. Thirty-five years later, she might well have added "and they're not shy about trying." Scholars today generally agree that the (recognized then as) unconstitutional theft of voting rights in 1807 was essentially a strategy in white male-led political parties' jockeying for power over the state. However, the specific assumptions and ideologies that made the strategy attractive and effective depended on racism, sexism, nationalism, classism, and good old-fashioned fear. Jan Lewis suggests that the voting rights of New Jersey's black women, white women, black men, and foreign-born residents were initially recognized simply out of revolutionary Americans' commitment to the underly egalitarianism of republican ideals. Irwin Gertzog is more pragmatic, arguing that the added specificity of "he or she", first restricted to half the state (1790) and eventually extended to the whole (1797), was already a calculated power ploy. Either way, by 1798 it's clear that the major political parties in the state, the Federalists and the Republicans, recognized especially the voting power of women. Despite the implicit and explicit restrictions on which women could vote--enslaved black women could not; free black and white women who were married could not (because under the law of coverture, they could not own property independently)--contemporary observers were daunted by the scale of potential women voters. A 1791 newspaper article was titled "The Humble Address of Ten Thousand Federal Maids"; in 1799, William Griffith similarly estimated, "of widows and spinsters above twenty one, there can not, I imagine be fewer than 10,000." In a state where elections could be decided by hundreds or even tens of votes, 10,000 was a daunting number. Furthermore, an idea was developing that we might consider a precursor to identity politics: the belief that groups like "women" and "black men" were homogenous blocs of voting interest. (But of course white men can have their own opinions.) On one hand, this meant that each party worked *furiously* to court The Woman Voter in hotly contested elections like the Essex County legislator race of 1797 (in which this all-powerful voting bloc amounted *seventy-five* women; I have not seen statistics on their race). On the other, it meant that both parties deeply feared the potential for women, black men, and immigrants to vote for the bad guys. And naturally, *both* parties developed a conviction that women, especially, would turn out for the other. Naturally, too, these parallel developments were both motivated by classism. Federalists worried that it was easier to get women to vote in (Republican-stronghold) towns than in (Federalist-stronghold) cities; Republicans worried that the women more likely to vote were the wealthier, conservative Federalists. They also seem to have simply assumed that black men and women were Federalists, period. Or at least, the party leadership--that is, the men actively seeking to acquire and maintain power--did. A ballot initiative to strip the vote from everyone with at least 50 pounds of property and implement a white male taxpayer-based system failed *miserably* with the general population. There was a definite rift developing between the regular electorate and the power-holders, who had nervously watched the French Revolution tear down waves of political leaders and feared a similar outcome if more widespread participation in American politics. The years between the 1800 election that so focused on winning women voters and 1806-07, when efforts to restrict suffrage kicked back up, witnessed several important developments. First, The Black Voter played the role of the desperately wooed in the 1804 election that The Woman Voter had in 1800, coupled with New Jersey's passage of a gradual emancipation law. Second, newspapers were filled with two-sided worry. Women voters were more likely to commit election fraud (generally accusations that enslaved women or free married women were sneaking in a vote); women were neglecting their proper duties to get involved in politics and society was falling apart; the initial constitutional recognition of women's voting wrights was wrong. BUT it was just that: a constitutional right, so they couldn't be deprived of it without a new constitution, and that wasn't happening. Judith Klinghoffer and Lois Elkis have argued that sexist ideology (they are not really concerned with race, unfortunately) had little to no role to play in these developments; the evidence does not seem to back that up. As with the editorials arguing that the 1776 constitution and 1790/97 amendments were wrong in extending voting rights to women, gender is not silent. But it's not the *driving* or causal factor. Rather, we can see how sexist and racist ideology played into the lust for political power and control, or rather, became the field on which it played out. The assumption that all women and all black people voted the same; the belief that losses were due to election fraud and of course it was women and black people committing the fraud. (For the record: Gertzhog says it was actually mostly men, and there is evidence for this. A lot of the fraud involved keeping polls open days or weeks too long, or waiting until the ballots for an area dominated by the other party were counted and announced so they'd know how many to...scrounge up in order to win. In other words: tactics conceived and operated by party leadership, i.e. white men). But while the initial recognition of voting rights and the first efforts at suppressing them had come from inter-party conflict, it was actually *intra*-party problems that ultimately killed suffrage for property-owning unmarried free black and white women and black men. Once again, the immediate cause was electoral politics and the relentless pursuit of power by white men; the means were racism and sexism. In 1804, the Republican party split both geographically and ideologically into a "moderate" and "liberal" wing (with the Federalists occupying the other "conservative" pole). Among other things, the liberals actually wanted *universal* suffrage, not even connected to property ownership! But naturally, this rivalry played out as "The Room Where It Happens." New Jersey needed a new courthouse, and the dominating Republicans were at war with themselves whether to put it in the liberal north or the moderate south. And a presidential election loomed. The moderates offered a compromise: we'll let you put the courthouse in (Republican) Newark if you agree to restrict voting to white male citizen taxpayers. And this will restore party unity and *we won't support the Federalist candidate.* So in this case, we know exactly what the moderates said to the liberals to get them to sell black and white women's and black men's suffrage down the river: political power. The liberal Republicans' acceptance of this bargain, thus, betrays their own racism and sexism. The desire to stay in power brought into conflict egalitarian republican ideals of equality and contemporary white patriarchy; white patriarchy won *in order for* their political power goals to succeed. Race and sex were not the cause, but were the tools. Further Reading: * Irwin Gertzog, "Female Suffrage in New Jersey, 1790-1807," *Women & Politics* 10 (1990) * Judith Klinghoffer and Lois Elkis, "'The Petticoat Electors': Women's Suffrage in New Jersey, 1776-1807," *Journal of the Early Republic* 12 (1992) * Robert Dinkin, *Before Equal Suffrage: Women in Partisan Politics from Colonial Times to 1920* (1995) * Jan Lewis, "A Revolution for Whom? Women in the Era of the American Revolution," in *A Companion to American Women's History* (2005)

new jersey granted women and racial minorities the right to vote in it's 1776 constitution. the state took away this rights in 1807. how and why did this occur?

<P> male citizens who paid taxes. This was largely a result of the Democratic-Republican Party's attempt to unify its factions for the 1808 presidential election. A faction within the party wanted to deny the vote to aliens and the non-tax-paying poor. The liberal faction within the party gave way on this, but also took the vote from women, who tended to vote for the Federal. New Jersey's 30-year experiment with female suffrage ended not mainly because of open opposition to the idea of women voting, but as a casualty of party politics and backroom bartering. Another factor was the renewed push by <P> votes) to the said judge, or either of the inspectors, who, on receipt thereof, shall, with an audible voice, pronounce the name of such voter, and if no objection is made to the voter, put the ballot immediately into the election box, and the clerk of the election shall thereupon take down the name of such voter in a book or poll list, to be provided for the purpose. Vote Rescinded for Women, non-Whites Between 1797 and 1807 women voted in large numbers in New Jersey. But in 1807 the state's legislature ignored the constitution and restricted suffrage to white <P> document for the State's government for the next 68 years. Among its provisions, the document granted suffrage rights to unmarried women and African-Americans who met the requirements of possessing sufficient assets or property as "freeholders". The legislature was elected each year and selected the state's governor. It did not specify an amendment procedure and had to be replaced entirely in a constitutional convention. The suffrage rights in the 1776 constitution were limited by the state legislature in 1807 to restrict voting rights to white male citizens who paid taxes. Women who voted in earlier elections tended to support

You're generalizing from a very small sample, and an anecdotal one at that. I've had three plug-in units in the past dozen years and they've all worked fine. So my three more than offsets your two, right? And your tech guy just wanted to sell you a new one.

why are carbon monoxide alarms so unreliable?

<P> will sound within a few minutes. This concentration-time function is intended to mimic the uptake of carbon monoxide in the body while also preventing false alarms due to relatively common sources of carbon monoxide such as cigarette smoke. There are four types of sensors available and they vary in cost, accuracy and speed of response, listed below. The latter three types include sensor elements that typically are given a five year life by the sensor manufacturers but with a warning that they could "fail at any time for any reason". At least one CO detector is available which <P> countries, including France, and some US states and municipalities have banned the use of domestic ionic smoke alarms because of concerns that they are not reliable enough as compared to other technologies. Where an ionizing smoke detector has been the only detector, fires in the early stages have not always been effectively detected. Carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide detection Carbon monoxide sensors detect potentially fatal concentrations of carbon monoxide gas, which may build up due to faulty ventilation where there are combustion appliances such as gas heaters and cookers, although there is no uncontrolled fire outside the appliance. High levels of <P> hygienists and first responders. Digital, fast responding portable type CO detectors are usually a better choice for real time "on the go" applications as they respond to low levels of CO in seconds rather than minutes or hours (which is the case for UL2034 listed residential alarm). Most manufacturers recommend that portable detectors are returned for re-calibration annually. Portable detectors should be regularly bump tested with a calibrated test gas to ensure that the sensors are still operative. Wireless Wireless home safety devices are available that link carbon monoxide detectors to vibrating pillow pads, strobes or a remote warning

the NFL referees are in a union. their contract is up, and it is time to renegotiate. the referees want a retirement plan. the NFL executives said no. furthermore, the NFL executives said 'until you agree to OUR terms, we will use replacement referees. so you better do as we say." the replacement referees are not trained well, and not experienced enough. they are making lots and lots of mistakes in games, mistakes which are effecting the results.

the referee problem in the nfl.

<P> forces them to behave significantly different than how they were taught to play the game. Another concern is the league's instructions to game officials to err on the side of caution, since questionable calls late in close games significantly affect their outcome. However, the medical community has supported the move, believing that it will help reduce concussions and other head injuries. The league did not end up suspending any players for violent or illegal hits, however several players were fined for these types of hits within the first few weeks of the crackdown. Officiating changes Mike Pereira resigned as the league's <P> in Week 3, the league announced that it would consider suspending players for illegal hits, such as helmet-to-helmet hits or other blows to the head. (Previously, players could only be fined for such hits.) The league also instructed all officials and referees to have an even higher level of attention toward flagrant hits. Game officials were also instructed to err on the side of safety, and throw flags even when in doubt. The crackdown has been controversial. Many defensive players have complained that the league is being too strict in their interpretation of what constitutes an "illegal hit", and that it <P> Referee (association football) The referee is the person responsible for enforcing the Laws of the Game (LOTG) during an association football match. He or she is the final decision-making authority on all facts connected with play, and is the only official on the pitch with the authority to start and stop play and impose disciplinary action against players during a match. At most levels of play the referee is assisted by two assistant referees (formerly known as linesmen), who are empowered to advise the referee in certain situations such as the ball leaving play or infringements of the Laws of

Yes. In the decade before the turn of the 20th century, there were six Australian colonies - NSW, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland, Tasmania and Western Australia (Western Australia had only become a self-administering colony in 1890). In this period, Britain was encouraging its dominions to amalgamate for more efficient management, and there were constitutional conventions in 1891 and 1897-98, In order to Federate, there needed to be referenda where a significant majority of each state voted in favour of Federation, or that state would not become part of the Federation. As a result, there was a series of constitutional referendums between 1898 and 1900 in the six Australian colonies. In each of those, a majority was obtained, and Australia was duly federated. Tasmania had very high levels of desire to become part of Federation; its 1899 vote had 94.4% of voter voting in favour of Federation - so clearly Tasmanian citizens with voting rights were in favour of the benefits of Federation. You can see some campaign posters for these referenda (from South Australia) here and here. Western Australia's presence in the Federation were more contingent, and their presence in the Australian federation is to some extent an accident of history. If there hadn't been a gold rush in the 1890s in Western Australia which brought in a large amount of people from the other colonies (who ended up voting in the 1900 referendum on whether to join), Western Australia would likely not have joined the federation. Previous to the gold rush, Western Australia had done well out of exports to the other colonies (for which the state charged tariffs), and those tariffs were phased out under federation. Further, federal tariffs on agricultural products, once Western Australia had signed up, harmed the predominantly agrarian Western Australian economy in comparison to the more industrialised East. The perception that Western Australia was getting a bum rap from the Federal government culminated in a referendum of Western Australian voters in 1933, in which around two-thirds of the Western Australian public voted for secession. This was put to the British parliament, who said it could only lawfully happen with a referendum of all the other states on the matter - which never happened. Sources: * Stuart McIntyre (2004) *A Concise History Of Australia, 2nd. Ed* * Thomas Musgrave (2003) 'The Western Australian Secessionist Movement', *Macquarie Law Journal, Vol 3*

when australia was being organized into a political entity, was any serious consideration given to having western australia or tasmania be separate political entities (like nz and png)?

<P> Secessionism in Tasmania Secessionism in Tasmania has been proposed several times throughout Tasmania's history. Pre-federation Before Federation, there was a lot of support for Tasmania joining the Commonwealth, though there was some opposition. The opposition argued that Federation would cause financial devastation to Tasmania, which obtained much of its revenue from customs and excise. Most prominently among those who were concerned about Tasmania's future in the proposed federation was state statistician R. M. Johnston, who was supported by the Tasmanian attorney-general, Andrew Inglis Clark, and Nicholas John Brown, speaker of the Tasmanian House of Assembly. Tasmanian delegates to the Australian Constitutional <P> this was unrealistic. and the women's non-party league of Tasmania gave support to the anti-federalists. In 1928, Thomas Murdoch introduced a motion into the Tasmanian Legislative Council calling for Tasmania's secession from the Commonwealth, although it was ultimately defeated. After the appointment of the Commonwealth Grants Commission in 1933, the Commission produced a report recommending that Tasmania receive £290000 in 1934-35, which significantly reduced the Tasmanian demands for secession. 1980s In the 1980s, both Labor Premier Doug Lowe and Liberal Premier Robin Gray seriously considered secession. 1990s In the 1990s, the First Party of Tasmania was formed, which aimed for Tasmanian secession. <P> Conventions successfully advocated for section 87 and section 96 to be included in the Australian Constitution. Early 1920s After federation, Tasmania lost much of its revenue due to the free trade provisions of the Australian Constitution, and was constantly dependent on grants from the Commonwealth to maintain itself (though it also gained revenue from its state lottery, which was popular in other states). This frustration began turning into calls for independence in the 1920s, which were supported by the Hobart Chamber of Commerce, and the Mercury newspaper - in 1922, the Mercury called for the "complete dissolution of the Federation". In 1925,

The nature of infinity is such that adding to it doesn't make it larger. Subtracting from it doesn't make it smaller. So (2 * *denumerable* infinity)= *denumerable* infinity, and *denumerable* infinity+ *denumerable* infinity= *denumerable* infinity. I think the problem is that you are imagining a fluid situation that isn't fluid. You aren't "creating" rooms (as you have stated in your explanation). All the rooms are already there, and they aren't being created, nor being destroyed. Your example of the string is a problem. You see, we have been talking about *denumerable* infinity, not *nondenumerable* infinity, which would more accurately describe the string (a continuum, rather than something compose of individual discrete objects). The same flaw in your conception is present in that analogy. The strings aren't "moving". It isn't a fluid situation.

infinite hotel paradox. is this a good explanation of infinity or does it violate the thought of infinity?

<P> Hilbert's paradox of the Grand Hotel The paradox Consider a hypothetical hotel with a countably infinite number of rooms, all of which are occupied. One might be tempted to think that the hotel would not be able to accommodate any newly arriving guests, as would be the case with a finite number of rooms, where the pigeonhole principle would apply. Finitely many new guests Suppose a new guest arrives and wishes to be accommodated in the hotel. We can (simultaneously) move the guest currently in room 1 to room 2, the guest currently in room 2 to room 3, and <P> result that is provably true. The statements "there is a guest to every room" and "no more guests can be accommodated" are not equivalent when there are infinitely many rooms. Initially, this state of affairs might seem to be counter-intuitive. The properties of "infinite collections of things" are quite different from those of "finite collections of things". The paradox of Hilbert's Grand Hotel can be understood by using Cantor's theory of transfinite numbers. Thus, while in an ordinary (finite) hotel with more than one room, the number of odd-numbered rooms is obviously smaller than the total number of rooms. However, in <P> found for any finite number of nested infinities of people, the same is not always true for an infinite number of layers, even if a finite number of elements exists at each layer. The set of real numbers, and the set of guests in this example, is uncountably infinite. Because no one-to-one pairing can be made between countable and uncountable sets, rooms at the hotel cannot be made for all of these guests, although any countably infinite subset of them can still be accommodated. If this variant is modified in certain ways, then the set of people is countable again. For example,

Voronoi diagram Given a set of chosen points in a plane (marked in the picture), for each chosen point the Voronoi polygon is the part of the plane that is closer to that point than to any other chosen point. For example, every part of the blue polygon in the upper left corner is closer to the marked point in that polygon than to any other marked point. One application is in computer data visualization. If each dot is a point on a scatter plot, then when you hover your mouse cursor over the plot you might want to show a tooltip next to the closest dot. But checking the distance to every dot to find the closest is inefficient, especially when the mouse is moving. So instead you compute the Voronoi polygons for each point. The point the mouse is closest to is the one whose Voronoi polygon it's in. The Delauney triangulation is related. In this image, the black dots are the points and the red lines are the Voronoi polygons for that set of points. The black lines connecting the points form the Delauney triangles. Two black dots are connected in the Delauney triangulation if those dots' Voronoi polygons share a border.

delaunay triangulation/voronoi diagram algorithms

<P> to higher dimension (as proved by Edelsbrunner and Shah), the runtime can be exponential in the dimension even if the final Delaunay triangulation is small. The Bowyer–Watson algorithm provides another approach for incremental construction. It gives an alternative to edge flipping for computing the Delaunay triangles containing a newly inserted vertex. Unfortunately the flipping-based algorithms are generally hard to be parallelized, since adding some certain point (e.g. the center point of a wagon wheel) can lead to up to O(n) consecutive flips. Blelloch et al. proposed another version of incremental algorithm based on rip-and-tent, which is practical and highly parallelized <P> sample points, the Delaunay triangulation gives a nice set of triangles to use as polygons in the model. In particular, the Delaunay triangulation avoids narrow triangles (as they have large circumcircles compared to their area). See triangulated irregular network. Delaunay triangulations can be used to determine the density or intensity of points samplings by means of the Delaunay tessellation field estimator (DTFE). Delaunay triangulations are often used to build meshes for space-discretised solvers such as the finite element method and the finite volume method of physics simulation, because of the angle guarantee and because fast triangulation algorithms have been developed. <P> intelligently picking the splitting lines the expected time can be reduced to O(n log log n) while still maintaining worst-case performance. A divide and conquer paradigm to performing a triangulation in d dimensions is presented in "DeWall: A fast divide and conquer Delaunay triangulation algorithm in Eᵈ" by P. Cignoni, C. Montani, R. Scopigno. The divide and conquer algorithm has been shown to be the fastest DT generation technique. Sweephull Sweephull is a hybrid technique for 2D Delaunay triangulation that uses a radially propagating sweep-hull, and a flipping algorithm. The sweep-hull is created sequentially by iterating a radially-sorted set of 2D points, and connecting triangles

Taiwan is not officially recognised as independent by most countries. China claims Taiwan is part of China, and they will refuse to have diplomatic relations with any country which recognises Taiwan. Since China is the bigger and more powerful of the two, most countries choose them over Taiwan. It's further complicated by the fact that on paper, Taiwan's government claims to be the government of all of China. I don't think the actual people in government really think they should rule China, but making an official declaration that Taiwan is an independent country that isn't part of China would antagonise China. So they've avoided doing so. So when it comes to events like the World Cup or the Olympics, China would object to treating Taiwan as if it's a completely separate country to China. So as a compromise, their team is called Chinese Taipei, recognising the fact that Taiwan is Chinese, but differentiating it from China's team by adding "Taipei" (which is Taiwan's capital city).

why is taiwan compelled to use "chinese taipei" as their national sporting team name?

<P> which, in effect, labels it the "Chinese Team", in the sense of a "team that is of Chinese ethnicity" as opposed to a "team from China". Starting around the time of the 2004 Summer Olympics, there has been a movement in Taiwan to change all media references to the team to the "Taiwanese Team", and the mainstream Taiwan Television (TTV) is one of the first Taiwanese media outlets to do so. Such usage remains relatively rare, however, and other cable TV channels currently refer to the ROC as the Zhonghua Team and the PRC as the Zhongguo Team, the China team <P> Taipei to Taiwan. The main argument for opposing the name change was worrying that Taiwan may lose its Olympic membership under Chinese pressure, which would result in athletes unable to compete in the Olympics. Other alternative references to the Republic of China References used in the international context to refer to the Republic of China or Taiwan differ according to the type of the organization. Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu The World Trade Organization officially uses "Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu" for the Republic of China, but "Chinese Taipei" is frequently used <P> the National Flag Anthem of the Republic of China was chosen as the anthem of the Chinese Taipei delegation. The Republic of China has competed under this flag and name exclusively at each Games since the 1984 Winter Olympics, as well as at the Paralympics and at other international events (with the Olympic rings replaced by a symbol appropriate to the event). Translation compromise Both the Republic of China (ROC) and the People's Republic of China (PRC) agree to use the English name "Chinese Taipei". This is possible because of the ambiguity of the English word "Chinese", which may mean

It creates pressure which then provides the force to move something. Exactly how it works depends upon what type of pump you are talking about and whether it is water air or something else that is being pumped.

how does a pump work?

<P> volume, and injection volume (i.e., throttling) is controlled by rotating the cylinders against a cut-off port that aligns with a helical slot in the cylinder. When all the cylinders are rotated at once, they simultaneously vary their injection volume to produce more or less power from the engine. Inline pumps still find favour on large multi-cylinder engines such as those on trucks, construction plant, static engines and agricultural vehicles. For use on cars and light trucks, the rotary pump or distributor pump was developed. It uses a single injection cylinder driven from an axial cam plate, which injects into the <P> pipe [1] starts to flow under the force of gravity and picks up speed and kinetic energy until the increasing drag force lifts the waste valve's weight and closes it. The momentum of the water flow in the inlet pipe against the now closed waste valve causes a water hammer that raises the pressure in the pump beyond the pressure caused by the water column pressing down from the outlet. This pressure differential now opens the delivery valve [5], and forces some water to flow into the delivery pipe [3]. Because this water is being forced uphill through the delivery <P> be closed off from the atmosphere to prevent water vapor saturation. Performance improvement Pumping capacity can be improved by prepumping the system by another simple and clean vacuum pump like a diaphragm pump or even a water aspirator or compressed-air venturi pump. Sequential or multistage pumping can be used to attain lower pressures. In this case two or more pumps are connected in parallel to the vacuum vessel. Every pump has a valve to isolate it from the vacuum vessel. At the start of the pump down all valves are open. The first pump is cooled down while the others are

There are plenty of algorithms that are suited for computers related to pi, but which are tractable with pen and paper? Can finding the n'th digit be done on paper reasonably?

happy pi day everyone!

<P> Pi Day History In 1988, the earliest known official or large-scale celebration of Pi Day was organized by Larry Shaw at the San Francisco Exploratorium, where Shaw worked as a physicist, with staff and public marching around one of its circular spaces, then consuming fruit pies. The Exploratorium continues to hold Pi Day celebrations. On March 12, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a non-binding resolution (111 H. Res. 224), recognizing March 14, 2009 as National Pi Day. For Pi Day 2010, Google presented a Google Doodle celebrating the holiday, with the word Google laid over images of circles and <P> pi symbols; and for the 30th anniversary in 2018, it was a Dominique Ansel pie with the circumference divided by its diameter. The entire month of March 2014 (3/14) was observed by some as "Pi Month". In the year 2015, March 14 was celebrated as "Super Pi Day". It had special significance, as the date is written as 3/14/15 in month/day/year format. At 9:26:53, the date and time together represented the first 10 digits of π. Observance Pi Day has been observed in many ways, including eating pie, throwing pies and discussing the significance of the number π, due to a <P> pun based on the words "pi" and "pie" being homophones in English ( /paɪ/), and the coincidental circular nature of a pie. Also, some schools hold competitions as to which student can recall pi to the highest number of decimal places. Massachusetts Institute of Technology has often mailed its application decision letters to prospective students for delivery on Pi Day. Starting in 2012, MIT has announced it will post those decisions (privately) online on Pi Day at exactly 6:28 pm, which they have called "Tau Time", to honor the rival numbers pi and tau equally. In 2015, the regular decisions were put

Yes. The early Soviet Union adopted laws protecting private property due to its desire to attract foreign investment. International protection of property rights were seen as a foreign policy issue and subordinate to foreign policy. The first such decree on intellectual property was made in 1917 and monopolized all patents and copyrights as property of the state, except for a limited six month right reserved to the authors. Between 1917 and 1931, there were frequent almost yearly changes granting rights between 15 years to the author or a five year monopoly to the State. The most consistent principal during this period was generally an acceptance of the Bern Convention of 1886. After the transition period, Soviet copyright law became generally unremarkable and closely mirrored that of civil law regimes in Europe. During the 1970's, the Soviet Union became a state party to three treaties: the Berne Convention on the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works as amended in 1971; the Universal Copyright Convention ("UCC") as amended in 1971, and the 1971 Convention on Protection of the Interests of Producers of Phonograms Against the Illegal Reproduction of their Phonograms. On February 21, 1973, the USSR enacted a series of amendments to its own law to bring it into line with the UCC. However, despite this regime, intellectual property cases were very rare due to the realities of a state controlled publishing industry. Oftentimes, the Soviet government would be both the official copyright holder and the infringing party, rendering much of the copyright law functionally relevant to foreign works but not to domestic authors who assigned their rights to the State to get published. Source: Boris N. Mamlyuk, Russia & Legal Harmonization: An Historical Inquiry into Ip Reform As Global Convergence and Resistance, 10 Wash. U. Global Stud. L. Rev. 535 (2011) tl;dr Basically, Soviet copyright laws were pretty vanilla and mostly similar to the west after the early revolution, making for a hum drum comparative analysis. The main difference arose from the realities of state control of media and publishing, which made copyright cases exceedingly rare and mostly a moot issue.

did the soviet union have intellectual property laws? if yes, how did it differ from capitalist countries?

<P> Copyright law of the Soviet Union Revolutionary Copyright The old Tsarist Copyright law of 1911 was not immediately invalidated after the October Revolution. The old law, with its copyright term of 50 years after the author's death and its possibility of transferring copyrights in their entirety from an author to a publisher, continued to be valid initially. But the nationalizations in all areas of the economy soon considerably restricted the avenues through which an author could publish her or his work, even if her or his copyright remained initially untouched. All publishing activities were placed under the supervision of the <P> to the payment of the standard royalties. The government also reserved the right to forcibly nationalize any work. Another characteristic that Soviet copyright law inherited from the Tsarist law was that copyright was automatic: copyright began with the creation of the work (not its completion or publication), and was not subject to registration. Copyright covered all literary and musical works as well as works of the arts and scientific works and also films by Soviet citizens, as well as works by foreign authors that were first published in the Soviet Union or, if unpublished, existed there in some objective form, irrespective <P> his publisher was abolished. Likewise, Soviet publishers were free to negotiate with foreign authors or publishers licenses to publish foreign works in the Soviet Union. Also in 1987, a work group tasked with adapting the Soviet copyright law to a market economy was formed. In early 1990, the work group presented a draft for a revised section IV of the Fundamentals on copyright and a new section IV A on neighbouring rights. But the proposal, comprising 32 articles, remained unused; the Supreme Soviet's Committee for legislation published in March 1990 its own draft version of the new Fundamentals that ignored many

Actually we do have a surprising amount of information for the life of an illiterate steppe-dweller. There was no tradition of history or literature beyond the oral in Mongolia pre-Genghis, but because they quickly saw the benefits of the written word when it came to ruling a huge, multiethnic empire they adopted writing in his lifetime. Our primary source is the *Secret History of the Mongols*. "Secret" because it was only intended to be read by the imperial family and court. It's essentially a biography of Genghis Khan/Temujin, apparently written shortly after his death by someone in his inner circle. Because of its limited audience and closeness to the actual events it's remarkably straightforward and earnest. Not all true, of course, but far from hagiography – it mentions unflattering details like Temujin being scared of dogs, for instance. I remember the film as being reasonably accurate with a few inexplicable deviations. If anything, Temujin actually got into more near-death scrapes than the film portrays. The Mongol steppe at this time was an extremely violent, fractious and generally dangerous place. But it's been a long time, so I decided to re-watch it and give you a proper answer. Here's my stream-of-consciousness historical commentary (mostly from memory, so forgive me if I make some errors of my own): * Right off the bat, Temujin was never imprisoned by the Tangut. I've no idea where this comes from. Presumably to give him an excuse for coming back later and destroying their civilization? * Temujin narrates that "[Yusugei] stole my mother from the Merkits". This slightly misleading: his mother (Hoelun) belonged to the Olkhunut, and Yusugei abducted her when she was on her way to marry a Merkit. * This thing about Temujin getting hitched to Borte (also of the Olkhunut) on a whim on the way to getting a Merkit bride is made up. Yusugei was taking Temujin to live with Borte's family, which was part of the marriage contract. It was traditional for the Borjigin (Temujin's lineage) to take wives from the Olkhunut, and the marriage itself was doubtless arranged beforehand. It was also very a much a political match between Yusugei and Borte's father Dai-Sechen, so I can't imagine there was a line-up involved. * Might as well clear this one up early: no the Mongols weren't scared of thunder. Apparently William of Rubrick mentions this in his later quasi-ethnography of the Mongol empire, but I've never seen it given any credence in scholarly works and it doesn't play any role in the *Secret History*. * As I just mentioned, the point of the trip was to leave Temujin with his bride's family. So he wasn't present on the return trip when Yusugei was poisoned by the Tatars (in the film they don't mention they're Tatars, just "enemies", but this explains Temujin's rather extreme treatment of the Tatars later in his life). The rest is pretty accurate though, for example it was a taboo to do harm to someone if you made camp together while travelling. * When Yusugei's followers are robbing and abandoning the family, Hoelun says "my son is khan now", referring to Temujin. This is wrong on a number of levels. First, Yusugei was never a khan, he led a small band of warriors, not an entire people. Second, power wasn't hereditary like that, it would have been absurd for his father's men to follow a child. Finally, Temujin had an older half-brother who was head of the family before him. * It's interesting that they put the "don't kill children that aren't taller than a cart-wheel" thing here. As far as I know, it was actually an innovation of Temujin's when he was committing semi-genocide against the Tatars (see what I mean by extreme treatment?) and later became part of his law code. There's no indication that it was a custom before then. * Most of Temujin's family are notably absent in the next sequence - his brothers, his father's other wife, and especially his eldest half-brother Bekhter. Temujin murdering him was probably the most notable event in his childhood. * It's unclear exactly how Temujin and Jamukha knew each other and came to be blood-brothers in their childhood. This is as plausible a story as any, I suppose. Temujin's early and lasting attachment to the "sacred mountain" (Burkhan Khaldun) is accurate; it's probably where he ended up buried. * The way he preys to Tengri for help there is a *very* simplified and westernised portrayal of Mongol religion, though. It wasn't monotheism, and it wasn't polytheism, it was animistic and shamanistic. Tengri was a personification of the sky, not a personal god, and discourse with the spiritual realm was something that had to be done through specialist mystics, you couldn't just start talking to them yourself. Genghis Khan's Empire (in common with many other steppe peoples) did come to believe it had the blessing of Tengri, but not in the direct ask-and-you-shall-receive monotheistic sense; it was more akin to the Chinese concept of the Mandate of Heaven (and, I'll shamelessly speculate, probably influenced by it). * Temujin was indeed held captive for a period in his childhood – not by his own clan, though, by the Tayichuud. His escape was more convoluted than the way he just runs off in the film. A sympathetic family took off his cangue when it was their turn to watch him. He ran off, but knew with his captors on horseback he'd never outrun them, so he hid in a river for a while, then doubled back and hid in the tent of the not-too-happy family that had set him free (reasoning that they couldn't turn him in without exposing their complicity) and finally extorted a horse from them. Later he came back to reward the family and their young son Chilaun became one of his foremost generals. * The second period of captivity, when he's an adult, never happened. * Genghis actually met Bo'orchu when the latter helped him chase down some horse thieves, but the gist of this encounter is accurate – Bo'orchu was a Good Samaritan and helped a down-on-his-luck Temujin, and like Chilaun went on to become one of his top generals. * Temujin was probably more interested in Borte's dowry (the famous Black Sable Coat) than the woman herself at this point. Temujin's family being so poor, this was one of their only tangible assets at this point, and giving it to his father's old blood-brother and patron Toghrul Khan was a very shrewd move that kick-started Temujin's political career. * It's strange then that Toghrul Khan is absent in the film, and his role is merged with Jamukha. I don't think this dynamic works very well. In reality, Jamukha and Temujin were equals and rivals for leadership amongst the Mongols, who were weak, fractured and subordinate to the Keraits. The Kerait khan Toghrul played them off each other for decades, until eventually he threw his lot in with Jamukha and against Temujin. It doesn't make sense to me how in the film the battle for overlordship of the steppes suddenly becomes a battle between Temujin and Jamukha. * I suppose the biggest Hollywoodism is the way the film is turned into a love story between Temujin and Borte. He was undoubtedly fond of Borte and she always had the pre-eminent position as his first wife and mother of his heirs, but at the end of the day it was an arranged marriage, Temujin took many, many other wives and the whole chivalric romance theme is just really anachronistic. Her capture by the Merkits illustrates this the best. In the film, Temujin nobly attempts to fight off the superior force with a stick, and later only leaves her when he's knocked unconscious by an arrow to the back (does this happen??) and Borte nobly sacrifices herself. In reality, Temujin and his brothers realised they had no chance of winning against the Merkits and fled as soon as they saw them coming, leaving not only Borte but Temujin's elderly stepmother behind (the latter doesn't appear in the histories after this episode). Pride and sentiment weren't really great survival strategies in the world Temujin grew up in, and this was far from the last time he adhered to the maxim "he that fights and runs away, may live to fight another day". Similarly, Borte's rescue was as much about Toghrul Khan and Jamukha having an excuse to plunder the Merkits as it was about Temujin's vengeance. * I like the way the Merkits are portrayed as forest people with crazy animal skin masks, but in reality they were steppe herders just like the Mongols. The depiction is more like the Buryats and Tungusic peoples that lived further north and weren't considered "people of the felt-walled tents" like the Mongols, Merkits, Tatars, etc. The Mongols set out to subjugate them only after Temujin became Genghis Khan. * A big sword fight, really? The film's called "Mongol"... where are the horses? The compact bows? * It's implied that Temujin starts to win more support amongst the men in the army than Jamukha because he's fair in giving out spoils and generally a better leader. This is the first hint in the film that Temujin did things differently from his rivals – dividing up spoils fairly and efficiently, looking after widows, disregarding tribal affiliation and incorporating defeated people into his nation as equals, his law code, etc. – and it's true all these things won him support in his long struggle with Jamukha. But the way it started was much more Machiavellian. Temujin originally became a contender for khan of the Mongols because a coalition of elders from his clan who resented Jamukha's rising power viewed him as a useful puppet. He had the right lineage, but he was a political nobody without much wealth or a power base of his own. * The film understandably has Jamukha as the villain, but really it was Temujin who broke with his allies Toghrul and Jamukha in order to contest his blood brother's position as khan. The Secret History justifies this with various slights they supposedly committed on him, but this is a recurring pattern – it often has Temujin pre-emptively betraying people who were supposedly about to betray him. People have suggested this shows the he was either slightly paranoid or in his later life not too proud of having stabbed so many people in the back. That was very much the way things were done in the steppe though. * It's accurate that Temujin was defeated by Toghrul/Jamukha at first (and on many other occasions besides), but he was never captured and sold to the Tanguts. * The laws he talks about briefly are the Yassa. It was indeed an important part of what set Mongols apart. * Having an entire army surrender to a thunder storm is of course, ridiculous. It occurs to me that there's a surprising lack of violence in this film considering its the story of how the bloodiest leader in all of history united one of the bloodiest people in all of history in a bloody, decades-long war. And again, where's the horseback archery!? * The whole timeline of the film seems really compressed, even though they do show the (correct) year on screen every now and again. Temujin was almost fifty by the time he'd defeated Jamukha, succeeded in uniting the steppe tribes and proclaimed himself Genghis Khan; in a way it was his life's work, the whole conquering-half-the-known-world thing more of an afterthought. * The Yassa did forbid men harming their masters, even to Temujin's benefit. * Temujin didn't spare Jamukha – he had his back broken with a rock. Although the fact that he didn't spill his blood was a sign of respect. On the whole, I don't think it's that bad piece of historical drama. Lots of figures and events are omitted (way more than I can list), and those that are in are compressed or altered, but there aren't a lot of outright fabrications (apart from the whole Tangut episode). Personally I feel like the original story as given in the Secret History is more than exciting and cinema-friendly enough to be filmed basically as-is, but I'm no filmmaker. I think it's also fair to say it sanitises Temujin a great deal. He was a complex figure, but by no means a nice guy. I've not commented very much on the non-story aspects, either. I can't tell you how accurate the costumes and sets are (one thing I did notice is that whenever they showed shots of camps or armies gathering there weren't many animals around, which is odd to say the least). I have read that the Mongolian spoken in the film is atrocious, because the leads aren't actually Mongolian (they're Japanese or Chinese) and it was directed by a Russian. But I can't begin to vouch for that myself (paging /r/mongolia). Still, I think it's a good film. And the soundtrack is by one of my favourite bands – you should check them out! As for sources, there are lots of biographies of Genghis Khan. I'd recommend Jack Weatherford's *Genghis Khan And the Making of the Modern World* as the most readable, thought-provoking and the best at putting the events in context (if sketchy on the details at times) or Ratchnevsky's *Genghis Khan: His Life and Legacy* for a more traditional and comprehensive historical account. I'd also recommend diving into the *Secret History* itself if you're really interested, it's well worth the effort. The translation I have is by Igor de Rachewiltz and it comes highly recommended, but it's hard to get hold of and frankly scarily huge.

how much of mongol can be considered an accurate portrayal of the early life of temudjin?

<P> modern culture There have been several films, novels and other adaptation works on the Mongolian ruler. Name and title There are many theories about the origins of Temüjin's title. Since people of the Mongol nation later associated the name with ching (Mongolian for strength), such confusion is obvious, though it does not follow etymology. One theory suggests the name stems from a palatalised version of the Mongolian and Turkic word tenggis, meaning "ocean", "oceanic" or "wide-spreading". (Lake Baikal and ocean were called tenggis by the Mongols. However, it seems that if they had meant to call Genghis tenggis they could have <P> Jin to positions of power. The Jin bestowed Toghrul with the honorable title of Ong Khan, and Temüjin with a lesser title of j'aut quri. Around 1200, the main rivals of the Mongol confederation (traditionally the "Mongols") were the Naimans to the west, the Merkits to the north, the Tanguts to the south, and the Jin to the east. In his rule and his conquest of rival tribes, Temüjin broke with Mongol tradition in a few crucial ways. He delegated authority based on merit and loyalty, rather than family ties. As an incentive for absolute obedience and the Yassa code of law, <P> made it easier for him to solicit help from and eventually consolidate the other Mongol tribes. Early life and family Temüjin had three brothers Hasar, Hachiun, and Temüge, one sister Temülen, and two half-brothers Begter and Belgutei. Like many of the nomads of Mongolia, Temüjin's early life was difficult. His father arranged a marriage for him and delivered him at age nine to the family of his future wife Börte of the tribe Khongirad. Temüjin was to live there serving the head of the household Dai Setsen until the marriageable age of 12. While heading home, his father ran into

No they didn't have sex for money, they did exactly as it's written on the jar, extremely sophisticated societal company for tea ceremonies and the like. The idea of them being prostitutes came post WW2 when Japanese prostitutez were dolling them selves up as Geisha in order to get clients without being actual Geisha

were "geishas" just high class prostitutes?

<P> refer to the genre of manga and anime in which pre-pubescent or pubescent male characters are depicted in a suggestive or erotic manner. Geisha A frequent focus of misconceptions in regard to Japanese sexuality is the institution of the geisha. Rather than a prostitute, a geisha was a woman trained in arts such as music and cultured conversation, who was available for non-sexual interactions with her male clientele. Geisha differed from their patrons' wives because, except for the geisha, women were ordinarily not prepared for activity other than household duties. This social limitation was imposed on the majority of women <P> in traditional society and produced a diminution in the pursuits that women could enjoy. This limitation also impacted the ways that a man could enjoy the company of his wife. The geisha fulfilled the non-sexual social roles that ordinary women were prevented from fulfilling, and for this service they were well paid. That being said, the geisha were not deprived of opportunities to express themselves sexually and in other erotic ways. A geisha might have a patron with whom she enjoyed sexual intimacy, but this sexual role was not part of her role or responsibility as a geisha. Fetish scene <P> Autobiography of a Geisha Early life As a child Masuda lived as a nurse-maid in a large farming household near Shiojiri, where she got little to eat, no education, poor sleeping quarters, and was frequently punished. She initially spent most of her time looking after the owners' young children but, after being caught taking extra melons from the field to feed herself, she was forced to do manual labor. During these years other children gave her the derisive nickname "Crane", as in the winter she was never allowed to wear socks and would lift one leg up and warm her

I'll try to outline some progression between hairstyles of Roman portraiture to ultimately argue that while styles changed, there wasn't really a decline in complexity or artistic skill in these portraits. Some important points to note though in examining stone portraiture would be the types of women being depicted. Obviously, these women would have been some of the richest in the empire and many of the portraits I'll use will be of those in the imperial family since they were more widely distributed and these women were some of the few that were given portraiture. As a result, while these hairstyles do represent trends in the upper class, they certainly don't for the lower classes and even the everyday wealthy Roman. **Before the Flavian Period (Julio-Claudian)** The Julio-Claudian period is probably the earliest you can start with since primarily women from the imperial family were often the only ones able to have art made of them. They were also one of the most widely created an distributed sources of female portrayals in Roman art. So we start with Augustus's wife Livia and this portrait alone is enough to show some of the messages that artists were trying to send. The youthful appearance of Livia is completely uncharacteristic of her since she was likely past 50 at the time this was commissioned. Comparisons have even been made that compare her to depictions of Roman deities, and this is a common trend within imperial portraiture. The hairstyle as well is not entirely a simple one, and some skill was required to sculpt the folds in her hair. Continuing into the reign of Tiberius (40 years prior to the beginning of the Flavian period) you have Agrippina the Elder, a member of the imperial family. One can see the growing complexity in Roman hairstyles for women (Not so much for men at this time) especially with innovations in drilling which would become commonplace for creating intricate hairstyles (Like the portrait of the Flavian woman you linked). So while I would say the Flavian period had some of the most extravagant hairstyles during the imperial period, earlier portraiture was not a simple as the portrait you linked to of preceding art. **The Flavian Period** Now we reach the period your question focuses on. Fortunately, the bust you linked is one of the more definitive examples of Flavian portraiture so there aren't really any other examples I need to link to. And this bust merely continues the trends of increasing complexity within hair through the increased drilling that was used with the earlier portrait of Agrippina the Elder. Interesting fact though, it is very plausible that the Flavian woman's hair is actually a hair piece, which may explain why it is so extremely elaborate. **After the Flavian Period (Nerva-Antonine and Severan Dynasties)** I want to begin by stating that complexity in hair didn't necessarily decline. Portraiture of men for instance from the mid 2nd century onward became just as complex in hair as these portraits of women. This is the case with emperors like Marcus Aurelius or Caracalla (I can link more if requested). However, you are right in saying later hairstyles for women, while complex, were not as extravagant as the Flavian woman bust. That being said, the extreme complexity was not the only defining trait of the styles. Height of hair was also extremely important, and supposedly Flavian styles meant to show tallness from the front and a sharp downward slope of hair towards the back. Elements of this are still present following the Flavians with the portrait of Trajan's wife Plotina. Later on, hairstyles returned to having the front much lower and natural. Examples off the top of my head include Hadrian's wife Sabina, Antoninus Pius's wife Faustina the Elder, and Marcus Aurelius's wife Faustina the Younger. So why are these new portraits much less flamboyant in hairstyles? One could argue that the end of the *Pax Romana* is mirrored by this decline of decadence and callback to more conservative styles. However the mass instability marked with the decline began during the later years of the Nerva-Antonine dynasty and the beginning of the Severans, far after we see changes from the Flavian hairstyles. This argument though, does explain certain portrait characteristics in later imperial art which I can elaborate on if anyone wants to know. The best explanation though, is just that styles change. Just because the the Flavian woman's hair does appear to be more flashy than later portraits, does not mean that it was more complex or required more skill than other busts. I earlier linked Faustina the Younger's portrait and I think hers is the best example of this, her hair is certainly not as extravagant, but it's not overly conservative, represents new trends, and still required incredible skill with sculpting and drilling. Also, to represent later styles you linked to what I think is a portrait of Julia Domna (Wife of Septimius Severus). And again the artistic skill required to depict the individual curls in her hair were also incredible. In fact, I'd argue the artistic complexity in the portrait as whole is greater than that of the Flavian woman with the increased emotion shown with Julia Domna through her facial expression and carved eyes. Furthermore, the overall style of her lowered hair is also quite complex as it was a type of wig that she pioneered as a style for Roman women in the Severan Dynasty **Sources:** Fred S. Kleiner, *A History of Roman Art: Enhanced Edition* Shelden Nodelman, *How to Read a Roman Portrait* Peter Stewart, *Roman Art* Edit: Clarification, drilling is meant to refer to the sculpting practice which made depictions of these complex hairstyles possible only in the realm of stone portraiture

what caused the flavian hairstyle for roman women to be so different from previous and future styles?

<P> to juxtapose Roman modesty against Cleopatra and her flamboyance. Flavian and Antonine hairstyles Flavian and Antonine hairstyles differed greatly between men and women in real life and in the physical appearance of hair for male and female sculptures. In ancient Rome hair was a major determinant of a woman's physical attractiveness, women preferred to be presented as young, and beautiful. Therefore, female sculptures were known to have dramatic curls carved with strong chiaroscuro effects. On the other hand, most men in the Flavian period of late first century CE have their hair trimmed short on the crown like the portrait <P> of Domitian for example (pictured) that implied an active role in society, while a woman's connoted passivity. Flavian and Antonine hairstyles are perhaps the most famous, and extravagant, of Imperial Rome's styles. During this time the aristocratic women’s style became the most flamboyant (cypriote curls). The styles were lofty, with masses of shaped curls and braids. The high arching crowns on the front were made using fillets of wool and toupees, and could be attached to the back of the head as well as the front. Typically, as in the case of the famous Fonseca Bust (pictured), this particular hairstyle appears <P> to have been popular during the Flavian period. The hair was combed into two parts; the front section was combed forwards and built with curls, while the back was plaited and coiled into an elaborate bun (Orbis Comarum). This fashion was described by the writer Juvenal as the hairstyles that made women appear tall from the front but quite the opposite from the back. The later Antonine Period saw curls at the front of the head brought to a lower level than the Flavian Period. The braids coiled at the back of the head were brought further forward, instead often resting

No, it wasn't about training dogs specifically, it was about conditioned behaviors. It was a completely new branch of psychology that was sparked by these observations.

why was the "pavlov's dogs" experiment significant enough to warrant a nobel prize? hadn't people been training dogs and other animals for thousands of years before?

<P> he eventually won the Nobel prize mentioned above. Pavlov investigated the gastric function of dogs, and later, children, by externalizing a salivary gland so he could collect, measure, and analyze the saliva and what response it had to food under different conditions. He noticed that the dogs tended to salivate before food was actually delivered to their mouths, and set out to investigate this "psychic secretion", as he called it. Pavlov's laboratory housed a full-scale kennel for the experimental animals. Pavlov was interested in observing their long-term physiological processes. This required keeping them alive and healthy in order to conduct chronic <P> experiments, as he called them. These were experiments over time, designed to understand the normal functions of animals. This was a new kind of study, because previously experiments had been “acute,” meaning that the dog went through vivisection which ultimately killed the animal in the process. A 1921 article by S. Morgulis in the journal Science was critical of Pavlov's work, raising concerns about the environment in which these experiments had been performed. Based on a report from H. G. Wells, claiming that Pavlov grew potatoes and carrots in his lab, the article stated, "It is gratifying to be assured that <P> 1901, Pavlov was nominated over four successive years for the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. He did not win the prize until 1904 because his previous nominations were not specific to any discovery, but based on a variety of laboratory findings. When Pavlov received the Nobel Prize it was specified that he did so "in recognition of his work on the physiology of digestion, through which knowledge on vital aspects of the subject has been transformed and enlarged". It was at the Institute of Experimental Medicine that Pavlov carried out his classical experiments on the digestive glands. That is how

Both are extremes; the reality in most cases lies between them. In general, an population of organisms will fairly quickly (in geological timescales) reach a point where it is as adapted to its environment as it can be, and it will settle into a niche. At that point, large scale changes aren't likely to happen, but there will still be mutations popping up in the genepool, creating variation. If any particular mutation isn't particularly malign, it'll stay in the gene pool for a while and might end up being useful if the environment changes again. It is also important to note that when dealing with fossil organisms, we only have very incomplete information about them. A fossil organism that appears to remain unchanged over the course of a million years would still be undergoing genetic changes at that time; it is just that all the genetic changes that don't directly show up in the fossil won't be recordable. That tends to make fossil population appear more "punctuated" than they really would be.

which model of evolution is more accepted by the scientific community: gradualism or punctuated equilibrium?

<P> and a descendant species, unless splitting occurs. Punctuated gradualism Punctuated gradualism is a microevolutionary hypothesis that refers to a species that has "relative stasis over a considerable part of its total duration [and] underwent periodic, relatively rapid, morphologic change that did not lead to lineage branching". It is one of the three common models of evolution. While the traditional model of palaeontology, the phylogenetic model, states that features evolved slowly without any direct association with speciation, the relatively newer and more controversial idea of punctuated equilibrium claims that major evolutionary changes don't happen over a gradual period but in localized, <P> Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge to contrast with their model of punctuated equilibrium, which is gradualist itself, but argues that most evolution is marked by long periods of evolutionary stability (called stasis), which is punctuated by rare instances of branching evolution. Phyletic gradualism Phyletic gradualism is a model of evolution which theorizes that most speciation is slow, uniform and gradual. When evolution occurs in this mode, it is usually by the steady transformation of a whole species into a new one (through a process called anagenesis). In this view no clear line of demarcation exists between an ancestral species <P> rare, rapid events of branching speciation. Punctuated gradualism is considered to be a variation of these models, lying somewhere in between the phyletic gradualism model and the punctuated equilibrium model. It states that speciation is not needed for a lineage to rapidly evolve from one equilibrium to another but may show rapid transitions between long-stable states. Linguistics and language change In linguistics, language change is seen as gradual, the product of chain reactions and subject to cyclic drift. The view that creole languages are the product of catastrophism is heavily disputed. Buddhism and other Oriental philosophies Gradualism is the

I think this question is flawed because it's not the case that the Church of England ever embraced arminianism en masse. Some parts of it have been calvinist in orientation since the Reformation. While the CofE didn't embrace the kind of calvinism that dominated scotland, it never embraced arminianism per se either.

why (and how/when) did the church of england come to reject calvinism in favour of arminianism?

<P> was crushed. In the same period English Arminianism existed (if at all) almost unavowed on paper, and since anti-Calvinist literature was censored, had no clear form until 1624 and a definite controversy. Footholds for Arminian views Certain churchmen are now labelled by historians as "proto-Arminian". These include prominent bishops of the period around 1600: Lancelot Andrewes, Thomas Dove, and John Overall. Theodore K. Rabb describes Edwin Sandys, a lay politician, as proto-Arminian. George Abbot suspected William Laud at an early stage of his career of anti-Calvinism; and attempted to block Laud's election as President of St John's College, Oxford. Laud, however, <P> Arminianism in the Church of England Elizabethan anti-Calvinists The Church of England's embrace of the Elizabethan Settlement allowed for a large-scale acceptance of Calvinist views. Such intense debates as occurred on theological points were localised, in contrast to the widespread tension over church polity. Predestination Peter Baro was a Huguenot Calvinist, but also close to Niels Hemmingsen, who was in the Lutheran tradition of Philipp Melanchthon that was brought to Denmark by John Macalpine (Maccabeus); Baro preached conditional predestination. A theological controversy on his teaching at Cambridge was brought to a head by William Barret. The intervention by John Whitgift <P> remained subject to effective censorship. Richard Bancroft as the first Archbishop of Canterbury chosen by James acted as an enforcer against Puritan nonconformity; George Abbot, however, who took over after Bancroft's death in 1610, was an evangelical Calvinist, and agreed with James on a solid opposition to Arminianism in the Netherlands, typified by the hounding of Conrad Vorstius and the loading of authority on the Synod of Dort as an international council of Reformed churches. During the period 1603 to 1625 Arminianism took shape as a Dutch religious party, became involved by successive appeals to secular authority in high politics, and

The answer is both complex and interesting. For starters we need to understand one key concept: the Malthusian trap. The Malthusian trap is the concept that for most of human history, we have been subsistence farmers and the standard of living never rose for most humans above subsistence farming levels. We also know that the technological advances that happened before the industrial revolution mostly caused rises in *population* rather than in *standard of living*. Once we understand that key concept, we have our real answer. The Victorians (as with most of Europe, the United States etc.) broke out of the Malthusian trap. This isn't exactly an exciting answer if you exclude why they managed to break out so I'll go into that in some detail. Now, please note that the causes of the industrial revolution in Britain and abroad still remains a major source of debate between historians so I'll do my best to provide some differing opinions. The first major cause for the industrial revolution for most historians is the major fall in the mid to late 17th and early 18th century in infant mortality. Mostly because by the mid 17th century the British were starting to abandon the old medical ways. Up until this point, medicine in Britain was still, frankly, medieval. The late 17th century would see the abandonment of many of the worse of what passed for medicine at the time (Bleedings, theory of humours, etc.) for a more scientific approach. It should also be said that during this time, there was a marked increase in the quality and frequency of border controls. Prof. Paul Slack author of *The Impact of Plague in Tudor and Stuart England* points to this being a major factor in the reduction of frequency in instances of the Plague. Which means that diseases, in general, began to spread far less widely than they did in the past. This may have simply resulted in a rise in population but this time around it was considerably different because the rise in population coincided with major and numerous other advances. Which brings me to our second cause. The massive increases in both farm labour (their productivity, to be clear) and land productivity. It all starts with the rise in the enclosure of farmland which reduces the amount of common land. The Crown and the Church had always been the two major land owners in Europe since the middle ages. In England, under Henry VIII, the Suppression of the Monasteries would free up massive swaths of land for free peasantry. It would gradually ramp up the enclosure and *improvement* of farmlands in comparison to their common land equivalent. The Dutch also contributed a lot to the increase in productivity. the first major advancement used in Britain was the water-meadow. A system of pasture irrigation that isn't in use today but was a major advancement in the 16th-17th century in England. It allowed for the pasturing of livestock far earlier by keeping worked pastures in the spring damp, keeping frost off the ground and making grass grow several weeks earlier. *This has no bearing on the question but I still think it's a fun little fact, men who took care and maintained water-meadows were called drowners. Not sure where this could've fit into my explanation so I'll just put it in here...* Agriculture during the period leading up to and during the industrial revolution is also marked by the introduction of scientific selective breeding. It saw the notable creation of the Dishley Leicester, the most productive sheep of it's era, and improvement of the Dishley Longhorn, which was the first beef cattle. Many contemporary sources talk of cattle weighing twice what they weighed after Bakewell's improvement of the breed, which is a considerable amount of extra productivity in cattle alone. But let's return to the contributions of the Dutch for a moment, a notable engineer Cornelius Vermuyden, had by the end of the 17th century popularized the use of Dutch land maintenance methods. There are varying estimates about the effects of the land maintenance reform but there is no debating that it led to a substantial increase in the amount of usable arable land. Which meant that farms often increased in size. The last truly farm-based improvement was the development of the Norfolk four-course crop rotation. Farmers switched from a three field system that resulted in large parts of farmland being left unproductive every season to one where there was very little need to leave any part of their land fallow. Where the British usually had fallow fields, they now put turnips or clovers on which to graze cattle, re-nitrate the soil and keep down weeds. Combined with the new breeds of cattle I've already talked about, this was a significant improvement. So, this all meant that farms were far more productive *far more easier* than they used to be. Which meant that they could be worked by significantly less people. All at the time of a massive surge in population. The population of Britain went from around 9 million in 1800 to nearly 42 million in 1901. This was also the age where the British realized that they could transport goods inside the country far easier using industrial canals. So centralized production of goods was most definitely in. So in short, as jobs left the countryside to the cities, so did people. Sources: Harrison - *The Common People, a History from the Norman Conquest to the Present* Clark - *The British Industrial Revolution: An Economic Perspective* Kerridge - *The Agricultural Revolution* **Thank you for the gold kind stranger. This is my first gilded comment, I am very touched.** **double gilded?! Thank you again kind stranger. That just made my day even better!**

if living conditions were so horrible in victorian cities, why so many millions of people moved from the country side to the cities?

<P> population density. Almost all pre-regulation terraced housing has been demolished through successive waves of slum clearance. History Between 1801 and 1901 the population increased fourfold, and during this period there was a migration from the land into towns (urbanisation), as the nature of work changed with the Industrial Revolution. Urban population increased tenfold, and there was a need to build houses for the urban worker. Employers built rows of back-to-back and through houses (i.e. those with front and back doors) on the ground available. In older towns they were constrained by the mediaeval street patterns and the need to fit <P> rivers and the housing next to the mills in the floodable low-lying ground. The particles from smoke from the steam engines' boilers descended and wrapped the adjacent housing in a layer of grime. The workers were unskilled and poor, so could pay little rent. Although their families were large, they squeezed in lodgers. The rural migrants preferred employment in the city to the lack of employment where they were born. Accompanying the Industrial Revolution was one in the countryside, as agriculture was mechanised. The medieval system of guaranteed shared land was being replaced by larger farms with tied cottages for fewer <P> a hard time getting their first job. Men over the age of 45, if they lost their job, would rarely find another one because employers had their choice of younger men. Millions were hired in the Great Depression, but men with weaker credentials were not, and they fell into a long-term unemployment trap. The migration in the 1920s that brought millions of farmers and townspeople to the bigger cities suddenly reversed itself. Unemployment made the cities unattractive, and the network of kinfolk and more ample food supplies made it wise for many to go back. City governments in 1930–31

So there are a lot factors let's start with the memory models. Encoding: Store information into our brain. Storage: Retain the information we encode. Retrieval: Store information out at a later time. Alright so first off you will have an external event occur. Such as a yellow bus passing and then a cat scratching you. Your sensory input of your eyes,ears, and smell (not all of them but for this example) then take this information into your sensory memory. Sensory memory: The immediate recording of sensory information in the memory system. From this stage your brain makes a choice in real time. Is the information you're picking up something worth focusing on or is novel information? Your brain will then encode it into your working memory (also called short term memory). Now from this point your brain has probably decided the bus is novel and the cat scratching you is worth remembering due the sensory inputs each give you. The cat scratch hurts and the bus is something you have probably seen plenty of times. Now to get something from your working memory to long term memory. You need another step of encoding. To recap. External Event > Sensory Input > Sensory Memory > Encoding of external events > events are now in working memory. Alright so we wanna remember the cat scratched us for whatever reason. The next step of encoding to reach long term memory storage where we use retrieval to remember things can be accomplished in a variety of ways. Sometimes we as humans make an effort to encode things. Such as studying for a test or not forgetting that persons name we just met. This is known as effortful processing. Things that we take in and do not process with effort are automatically processed. Think of the 100000 things you filter out when you look anywhere. From the patterns on the walls the amount of threads in the carpet. So what causes long term memories to form? Like those random or arbitrary ones from childhood? Stimulus that is new to you that you latch on to for either survival or interest. Adrenaline also has a way of carving vivid memories in ones long term storage. This why people that suffer trauma often have such intense memories and emotions of the traumatic event. If you want to study to encoding something into long term memory. Effortful processing via rehearsal, Mnemonics, and Chunking are all methods commonly used. Mnemonics. Vivid imagery associated with a memory to help us remember. Generally the more bizarre the better. I want to remember /u/hellaradmakayla so imagine those letters on a chalk board next to something I would not normally see. Like a bright blue pineapple. Chunking. Organizing information into manageable units. Remembering the numbers 18885674567 is probably hard for most people. But as 1-888-567-4567 or how we code phone numbers it becomes easier. Tl;Dr You must use effortful processing to store long term memories or the adrenaline from an event can also carve memories into it more deeply and vividly such as those that suffer traumatic events. As a young child your brain is forming rapidly and new stimulus is very common sometimes your brain decides this specific event or stimulus is important. Often at the younger ages a reason is hard to discern for these memories we have.

memory recall

<P> memory." <P> glaring inability to incorporate free recall into the model. Free recall requires an individual to freely remember some list of items. Although the very act of asking to recall may act as a cue that can then elicit cued recall techniques, it is unlikely that the cue is unique enough to reach a summed similarity criterion or to otherwise achieve a high probability of recall. Another major issue lies in translating the model to biological relevance. It is hard to imagine that the brain has unlimited capacity to keep track of such a large matrix of memories and continue <P> In the recall process, items residing in short-term memory store will be recalled first, followed by items residing in long-term store, where the probability of being recalled is proportional to the strength of the association present within the long-term store. Another memory storage, the semantic matrix, is used to explain the semantic effect associated with memory recall.

A combination of spoilers, engine reverse thrusters and brakes on the wheels. The spoilers are upper surface flaps that deploy and disturb the airflow on the wing. They kill the lift on the wing to prevent the aircraft from getting enough lift to come up again, and create a lot of drag to help the plane slow down. Engine reverse thrusters work exactly as the name implies. The jet plume from the engine is re-directed forwards, so the thrust acts backwards, thus slowing the plane down. Wheel brakes work more or less the same as they do in a car.

how does aircraft brake to reduce speed when landed

<P> the rear of the craft, forcing the rear wheels harder against the ground, which aids the wheel brakes by helping to prevent skidding. The pilot will usually continue to hold back on the stick even after the elevators lose their authority, and the nose wheel drops, to keep added pressure on the rear wheels. Aerodynamic braking is a common braking technique during landing, which can also help to protect the wheel brakes and tyres from excess wear, or from locking up and sending the craft sliding out of control. It is often used by private pilots, commercial planes, fighter aircraft, and <P> carriers, arresting gears are used to stop an aircraft. Pilots may even apply full forward throttle on touchdown, in case the arresting gear does not catch and a go around is needed. Parachutes are used to slow down vehicles travelling very fast. Parachutes have been used in land, air and space vehicles such as the ThrustSSC, Eurofighter Typhoon and Apollo Command Module. Some older Soviet passenger jets had braking parachutes for emergency landings. Boats use similar devices called sea anchors to maintain stability in rough seas. To further increase the rate of deceleration or where the brakes have failed, several mechanisms can <P> a method used in landing aircraft to assist the wheel brakes in stopping the plane. It is often used for short runway landings or when conditions are wet, icy or slippery. Aerodynamic braking is performed immediately after the rear wheels (main mounts) touch down, but before the nose wheel drops. The pilot begins to pull back on the stick, applying elevator pressure to hold the nose high. The nose-high attitude exposes more of the craft's surface-area to the flow of air, which produces greater drag, helping to slow the plane. The raised elevators also cause air to push down on

In the 50's switchblades became associated with criminals due their portrayal in films and television. Greasers, mobsters and other thugs were commonly seen carrying them and it led to a public scare and the subsequent passing of the USA Switchblade Act of 1958.

why are switchblades illegal?

<P> requires permission from the prefectural public safety commission in order to possess. Lithuania According to Lithuanian law it is illegal to carry or possess a switchblade if it meets one of the following criteria: the blade is longer than 8.5 cm; the width in the middle of the blade is less than 14% of its total length; the blade is double sided. Mexico legal. Netherlands As of 2011, it is prohibited to own or possess, whether kept at home or not, any stilettos, switchblades, folding knives with more than one cutting edge, and throwing knives. New Zealand The Customs Import Prohibition <P> folded and locked in the closed position. During the 1950s, US newspapers as well as the tabloid press promoted the image of a new violent crime wave caused by young male delinquents with a stiletto switchblade or flick knife, based mostly on anecdotal evidence. In 1954, Democratic Rep. James J. Delaney of New York authored the first bill submitted to the U.S. Congress banning the manufacture and sale of switchblades, beginning a wave of legal restrictions worldwide and a consequent decline in their popularity. History Switchblades date from the mid-18th century. The earliest known examples of spring-loaded blades were constructed by <P> III of the Criminal Code defines such knives as prohibited weapons (armes défendues). While certain businesses can be granted a licence to acquire and possess prohibited weapons such as switchblades for use as props in movie productions, these exemptions do not apply to individuals. The Criminal Code definition of "prohibited weapons" includes switchblades: "A knife that has a blade that opens automatically by gravity or centrifugal force or by hand pressure applied to a button, spring or other device in or attached to the handle of the knife." Different subsections of the code describe possession offences and penalties. Belt-buckle daggers, push-daggers, finger-ring

It would help if you explained why you want to know. In other words, at what level do you want to know how it works? Basically a bus is a wire (or set of wires) between two (or more) points. When you "put data on the bus" all you are doing is changing the voltage on the wire(s) to a certain level. The "read data from the bus", you detect which voltage is on the wire(s). The PCI bus is just a bus that uses the PCI protocol to communicate data. A protocol is just a method that we all agree on so that we can understand each other: For example, high voltage means 1 and low voltage means 0. If you are designing hardware that has to interface with the PCI bus, you will obviously need more detail, but then you shouldn't be asking for ELI5 information. :)

how the pci bus works

<P> Proprietary local buses (q.v. Compaq) and then the VESA Local Bus Standard, were late 1980s expansion buses that were tied but not exclusive to the 80386 and 80486 CPU bus. The PC/104 bus is an embedded bus that copies the ISA bus. Intel launched their PCI bus chipsets along with the P5-based Pentium CPUs in 1993. The PCI bus was introduced in 1991 as a replacement for ISA. The standard (now at version 3.0) is found on PC motherboards to this day. The PCI standard supports bus bridging: as many as ten daisy chained PCI buses have been tested. Cardbus, using <P> the PCMCIA connector, is a PCI format that attaches peripherals to the Host PCI Bus via PCI to PCI Bridge. Cardbus is being supplanted by ExpressCard format. Intel introduced the AGP bus in 1997 as a dedicated video acceleration solution. AGP devices are logically attached to the PCI bus over a PCI-to-PCI bridge. Though termed a bus, AGP usually supports only a single card at a time (Legacy BIOS support issues). From 2005 PCI-Express has been replacing both PCI and AGP. This standard, approved in 2004, implements the logical PCI protocol over a serial communication interface. PC/104(-Plus) or Mini PCI are <P> bus for computer systems to carry multiple streams of digital video without using the existing backplane bus. Apple was particularly interested in this role due to the limitations of their current NuBus systems in terms of speed. They envisioned various video cards using a second connector located near the top of the card, opposite the NuBus connector on the bottom, to talk to each other. Optionally, one of the cards would produce compressed output, which could be sent over the NuBus for storage or display. Before any commercial use of QuickRing, newer versions of PCI started appearing that offered performance

> Sometimes a fight would take place in a tunnel - 4 feet x 3 feet - and in the dark you didn't know who you were fighting. The only thing was to put your hand over quick to feel if the man had any epaulettes; the Germans used to have epaulettes on the shoulder and we could tell that way. The knuckle knife was very good. One of our officers invented that. It was a specially made knife with a blade about five inches long which was fitted to a brass frame over our hand and strapped to our wrist, so when our fist was closed the knife was at a right angle to our arm. It was silent in action - very handy, especially for raiding galleries. > Lieutenant John Westacott, 2 Canadian Tunnelling Company, quoted in *Beneath Flanders Fields* by Barton, Doyle & Vandewalle This quote gives a tiny snapshot of just one of the horrors faced by men of the Tunnelling Companies as they worked beneath the battlefields of WW1, and gives a hint of why they were held in respect by those who knew what their work entailed. I don't know about Churchill or the aristocracy in general, but Field Marshall Haig wrote the following message when the Companies were rapidly disbanded after the Armistice to release desperately-needed skilled labour: > A large number of men are now being withdrawn from the Tunnelling Companies for urgent work at home. > Before they leave the country I wish to convey to the Controllers of Mines and all ranks of the Tunnelling Companies, both Imperial and Overseas, my very keen appreciation of the fine work that has been done by the Tunnelling Companies throughout the last four years. > At their own special work, Mine Warfare, they have demonstrated their complete superiority over the Germans, and whether in the patient defensive mining, the magnificent success at Messines, or in the preparation for the offensive on the Somme, Arras and Ypres, they have shown the highest qualities both as Military Engineers and fighting troops. > Their work in the very dangerous task of removing enemy traps and delay-action charges... has been on a level with their work on the mines. > They have earned the thanks of the whole Army for their contributions to the defeat of the enemy. Their fighting spirit and technical efficiency has enhanced the reputation of the whole Corps of Royal Engineers. The tunnellers were essentially men working underground, best known for mining operations, but also responsible for building other subterranean works, such as key dugout complexes (some holding up to 600 men) and subways (huge shelters to move and protect large bodies of troops forming up for an attack, sometimes including concealed exits out into no-man's land which would be blown at the key moment to allow troops to pour out close to the enemy line, rather than attacking from their own trenches). But it was the mining operations that were the best known and most terrible facet of the underground war. Mining (digging under no-man's land towards the enemy trenches) was first used offensively by the Germans on their VII Corps front around Givenchy-Festubert on 20 December 1914, when they detonated 10 'small' (by later standards) explosive charges under the trenches of the Indian Army's Sirhind Brigade. This surprise was followed by an immediate and very successful infantry assault that drove the stunned Indians back 500 yards to their reserve lines. The British had already been mining defensively to protect against enemy tunnelling, but this attack prompted them to go on the offensive too. The Royal Engineers were already overstretched, so the first efforts involved scouring front-line units for men with mining experience, then looking at home for men such as coal miners, men who had worked on digging the London Underground train system, and sewer workers. In some cases these men had virtually zero military training - in one case a group of Manchester sewer workers went from working in the sewers to tunnelling on the Givenchy front in just five days, forming the nucleus of 170 (Tunnelling) Company, RE, in February 1915. Rapid expansion followed. Whole volumes have been written on the work of the Tunnelling Companies, but a quick overview of a mining operation is as follows. A deep shaft would first be sunk in the friendly trenches, with a 'shaft house' at the entrance for the air pump etc. Narrow tunnels (known as 'galleries') were then driven underground towards the enemy line. The work was complicated by the fact that it had to be done as silently as possible, as the enemy miners were driving their own galleries in the opposite direction, and each side would be listening out for any sound made whilst working. Once under the enemy position, a mine chamber would be dug out and packed with explosives, which would be fired electrically at a key moment, usually a series of them at the start of a major offensive. There were obviously huge dangers involved for the men working below ground. These ranged from the natural - such as collapses and carbon monoxide build-up - through to viscous combat with enemy tunnellers. If the other side heard you digging nearby, they might set an explosive charge, called a *camouflet*, in their own tunnel and set it off to kill or trap you underground. One side might also break into the other's tunnel system and brutal, often hand-to-hand, fighting would ensue, which again would end with charges being set off to wreck the earthworks and kill or trap the enemy miners. Towards the end of the war, as action became more mobile and less trench-bound in 1918, the Tunnelling Companies moved on to yet more dangerous work above ground, dealing with booby-traps and unexploded shells, including gas. I think, then, it is the sheer amount of danger that they faced that would earn a man involved in tunnelling great respect from those who understood what his work entailed. > Main source is *The Western Front Companion* by Mark Adkin, which features an excellent section on mining operations.

who were the tunnelers in ww1 and why were they so respected?

<P> 252nd Tunnelling Co attached to search dugouts and roads for booby-traps and mines, clear broken bridges wit explosives, and it also reconnoitred village wells that had been damaged by the retreating Germans. <P> 258th Tunnelling Company Background By January 1915 it had become evident to the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) at the Western Front that the Germans were mining to a planned system. As the British had failed to develop suitable counter-tactics or underground listening devices before the war, field marshals French and Kitchener agreed to investigate the suitability of forming British mining units. Following consultations between the Engineer-in-Chief of the BEF, Brigadier George Fowke, and the mining specialist John Norton-Griffiths, the War Office formally approved the tunnelling company scheme on 19 February 1915. Norton-Griffiths ensured that tunnelling companies numbers 170 <P> 252nd Tunnelling Company Background By January 1915 it had become evident to the BEF at the Western Front that the Germans were mining to a planned system. As the British had failed to develop suitable counter-tactics or underground listening devices before the war, field marshals French and Kitchener agreed to investigate the suitability of forming British mining units. Following consultations between the Engineer-in-Chief of the BEF, Brigadier George Fowke, and the mining specialist John Norton-Griffiths, the War Office formally approved the tunnelling company scheme on 19 February 1915. Norton-Griffiths ensured that tunnelling companies numbers 170 to 177 were ready for deployment

On January 30, 1968, the day of "Tet" (the Vietnamese New Year), the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army launched a major military campaign that would spell the end of Johnson's presidency. The Johnson administration had, up to that point, guaranteed the American public that the United States was on the verge of winning the war (which Johnson had escalated into a full-blown American operation in 1965). The so-called "Tet Offensive" proved that opposition in Vietnam remained much stronger than Johnson had indicated. Video of Viet Cong soldiers storming the American embassy in South Vietnam made the nightly news. On February 27, news anchor Walter Cronkite delivered a still-famous monologue on air in which he declared that while the United States did not look like it would lose the war, it was now obvious that it could not win it either. The anti-war protest movement, which had existed for years, exploded into the mass movement which we remember today. Protesters followed LBJ around on his campaign trail, chanting "Hey! Hey! LBJ! How many kids did you kill today?", among other popular forms of protest. Some historians have described LBJ as being "trapped" in the White House at times, unable to come outside to face the protesters. In the first Democratic primary, held in New Hampshire on March 12, Johnson won--but only by a narrow margin--against the long-time anti-war Democrat Eugene McCarthy. With this near loss and the chaos of the anti-war movement continuing to escalate around him, Johnson determined that he could not win the general election that year. Nevertheless, Johnson remained president and he and he maintained a series of foreign-policy goals that he hoped to accomplish before the end of his term. He therefore announced on March 31 that he would neither seek nor accept the Democratic nomination for the presidency, and he thereafter focused on ending the war in Vietnam and continued to pursue an arms reduction treaty with the Soviet Union (work that he could do outside the eye of the public, mind you). Here the story of the Democratic primaries and Lyndon Johnson's final push diverge. In short, Robert Kennedy quickly overtook McCarthy after entering the race, but he was assassinated before the convention, and the far less charismatic Hubert Humphrey ended up taking the nomination at the infamously protested Democratic National Convention of 1968. Johnson, on the other hand, made great strides towards realizing a detente with the Soviet Union, but he had to cancel an arms-reduction summit with Soviet Premier Alexi Kosygin after the Soviet Union invaded Czechoslovakia (this details of this story are an further stain on his legacy, I have to add). In the end, the Democrats ended up with a candidate who could not win and Johnson left office without having achieved a single foreign-policy accomplishment that could compare to his enormous failure in Vietnam.

why wasn't lyndon johnson, the incumbent, selected to to the democratic nominee in the 1968 presidential election?

<P> the Democratic convention could choose a candidate based on their personal preference. Historian Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., and others have argued that Kennedy's broad appeal and charisma would have been sufficiently convincing at the 1968 Democratic National Convention to give him the nomination. Historian Michael Beschloss believed that Kennedy would not have secured the nomination. Humphrey, after a National Convention in Chicago marred by violence in the streets, was far behind in opinion polls but gained ground. He ultimately lost the general election to Republican Richard Nixon by the narrow popular vote margin of 43.4 percent to 42.7 percent. Nixon won by <P> was technically still exploring his candidacy and had not bothered to file. Just a few days later, on March 16, 1968, Robert F. Kennedy announced he was entering the race for President. Johnson subsequently withdrew from the election with this Shermanesque statement: "I shall not seek, and will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your president." One minor candidate in the Republican primary was William W. Evans, Jr., a former New Jersey State Assemblyman, who received just 151 votes statewide. The 1968 New Hampshire Democratic primary was one of the crucial events in the politics of that <P> Party's Solid South since the end of the Reconstruction era in the 1870s, the Democratic nomination for statewide office had long been considered tantamount to election. In 1948, the Democratic nomination for U.S. Senator to succeed the retiring W. Lee O'Daniel was won by Lyndon Johnson, who defeated the more conservative Coke Stevenson by less than 100 votes in a bitter runoff election that included allegations of fraud. Carlos G. Watson initially received the Republican nomination. Watson, a loyal Republican who had run several unsuccessful campaigns for the U.S. House and U.S. Senate as a token candidate so that

Egypt contrary to what the media would have told you shortly after Mubarek was taken out, was frail. They were already hurting from lack of basic supplies, gas, food, money...and when the revolution ended and Morsi stepped up to plate they expected real change. The people had thought they had forced the hand of the government and showed them they would not stand for inequality and an overall lack of livelihood. In comes Morsi, and nothing has changed. In fact it was looking rather scary as Morsi was pushing through laws that left him all but a dictator. The Egyptian people took to the streets for a second time and were successful once again in taking out their own leader. However, the control is now in the army's hands. The single most powerful entity in Egypt. Think the United States army with free roam to do whatever they want without having to take orders from the President. Also the Egyptian army has what some are calling a monopoly on jobs and job creation in Egypt. The bad part about this is those working in these factories are part of the army and aren't getting paid anything to be there. Essentially it's like Apple being owned by the US's army and the soldiers are the ones designing the next iPad but not getting paid an engineer salary, just the base army pay. A law was just passed to stop any form of protest, or gathering from happening and it seems like another revolution, the "final" revolution will take place in Egypt. Hopefully, for their sake and the worlds, this will be the final necessary step to truly change the country for the better. If they are successful, they could become the single most important country when it comes to influencing people in westernized countries to take to the streets and create the change they want to see. **EDIT I posted this answer when this thread was pretty much empty and since then there's been some awesome responses that go more in depth into the situation that I tried to do with this one. I implore everyone to read deeper into the thread and read some of the more detailed answers if your looking for a longer summation of what occurred**

why was elected egyptian president mohammed morsi ousted so quickly?

<P> the Army is in support of them. However, the statement was interpreted by Morsi supporters as a warning to Morsi opponents that el-Sisi would not allow an overthrow of the government. He remained in office under the new government formed after the deposition of Morsi, and led by Hazem al-Beblawi. He was also appointed Deputy Prime Minister of Egypt. On 27 January 2014, he was promoted to the rank of field marshal. Civil uprising, coup d'état and transition Mass demonstrations occurred on 30 June 2013 as tens of millions of Egyptians took to the streets to denounce Mohamed Morsi. Clashes <P> took place around Egypt. Soon afterwards, the Egyptian Army issued a 48-hour ultimatum which aired on television that gave the country's political parties until 3 July to meet the demands of the anti-Morsi demonstrators. The Egyptian military also threatened to intervene if the dispute was not resolved by then. On 3 July 2013, the Egyptian Armed Forces declared that as the political parties had failed to meet the deadline and Morsi had failed to build a national consensus for his leadership, the army had to overthrow Morsi in a coup d'état. The army then installed Adly Mansour as the interim head <P> to crack down on terrorism. While supporters interpreted this to mean that el-Sisi felt the need of the people to prove to the world that it was not a coup but the popular will, the statement was seen by opponents as contradicting the military's pledges to hand over power to civilians after removing Morsi and as indicating an imminent crackdown against Islamists. The reactions to el-Sisi's announcement ranged from open support from the Egyptian presidency and the Tamarod movement to rejection, not only by the Muslim Brotherhood, but also by the Salafi Nour Party, the Islamist Strong Egypt Party, the liberal

Wikipedia gives a decent explanation. Terrence Malick isnt one to "spoon feed" people the concepts. Personally, I think his movies are a bit ahead of his time but he's still one of my favorite directors.

the tree of life (movie)

<P> related to the tree of life. <P> of Time. The Hollywood Reporter described it as "a celebration of the Earth, displaying the whole of time, from the birth of the universe to its final collapse." The film is the culmination of a project that Malick has been working on for over forty years, and has been described by Malick himself as "one of my greatest dreams". The film features footage shot by Malick and collaborators over the years, and expands on the footage that special effects luminaries Douglas Trumbull (2001) and Dan Glass (The Matrix) created for The Tree of Life. The film was released in two versions: <P> The Tree of Life Malick's fifth feature, The Tree of Life, was filmed in Smithville, Texas, and elsewhere during 2008. Starring Brad Pitt, Jessica Chastain, and Sean Penn, it is a family drama spanning multiple time periods; it focuses on an individual's struggle to reconcile love, mercy and beauty with the existence of illness, suffering and death. It premiered at the 2011 Cannes Film Festival, where it won the Palme d'Or. It later won the FIPRESCI Award for the Best Film of the Year. At the 84th Academy Awards, it was nominated for three awards, including the Academy Award for

The "low" numbers are counting people who were immediate and direct casualties from the disaster. So there were people who were exposed to enough radiation that they died in a few weeks, and some people who died in the immediate hours of the accident itself. The "high" numbers are extrapolations based on the amount of radiation that people were exposed to some distance from the plant, and what fatal cancers are associated with those numbers. Which is to say: some number of people died of cancer in Europe after 1986. How many of those are attributable to their Chernobyl exposure? The number is too small to directly measure (because the cancer rates can fluctuate from year to year anyway by a small amount), so it's not like the cancer rate just sky-rocketed. There are guidelines for understanding how a given exposure of radioactivity affects an individual's likelihood of developing cancer, though these can be controversial for very low doses of radiation. So this is where there is, and will probably always be, considerable uncertainty. Did someone's cancer come from Chernobyl, random genetics, cosmic radiation, other environmental factors, or what? This isn't easy to figure out, especially in the case of radiation that went fairly diffusely over a very large, highly-populated area. So ultimately this is a tricky job — radiation-caused cancers do not carry any kind of obvious and unique "signature" of their origins, most of the time. So you have to infer them epidemiologically (e.g., change from baseline) or sometimes purely probabilistically (if the number of cancers is relatively small). As for which number is "believable": this will depend entirely on what your methodology is. A very careful, honest, non-alarmist, (pro-nuclear), experienced physicist colleague of mine did a peer-reviewed literature review of all of the Chernobyl estimates for the Federation of American Scientists a few years back. He concluded that the estimates in the range of 26,000-57,000 were the most supported by our current understanding of both the radiation hazards posed by Chernobyl, our present understanding of the effect of low doses of radiation on population cancer risks, and our understanding of how many people were exposed. I find this plausible, myself. It sounds like a large number, but compared to the total fatal cancers in Europe from 1986 through the present it is actually fairly small, which is why they don't stand out from the baseline (approx. 2 million people in Europe die from cancer every year). My colleague also does a good job of discussing the uncertainty involved. His article is deliberately very readable. See: Edward A. Friedman, "Calculating the Uncountable Deaths from Chernobyl," _Public Interest Report_ 69, no. 2 (Winter 2016/2017), 17-27. Personally I find the low estimates very unreliable: I just don't buy that dusting a considerable fraction of Europe, an area populated by millions, with fission products would not cause some serious damage. I do not find the hormesis ("radiation is good for you") thesis compelling, or supported by the data that I have looked at. But again, if you go into this with different assumptions, you will get different outcomes, because it's not something we can directly measure, only infer.

the death toll for chernobyl ranges wildly, from a few hundred to tens of thousands. which numbers are the most believable and why? furthermore, why is it so hard to establish a concrete number for the disaster?

<P> lowering levels, like at the central district of Okuma town, to 9 mSv/year, one-fifth the level of five years ago. Chernobyl disaster As of 2013 the 1986 Chernobyl disaster in the Ukraine was and remains the world's worst nuclear power plant disaster. Estimates of its death toll are controversial and range from 62 to 25,000, with the high projections including deaths that have yet to happen. Peer reviewed publications have generally supported a projected total figure in the low tens of thousands; for example an estimate of 16,000 excess cancer deaths are predicted to occur due to the Chernobyl accident <P> 31 people. Following the Chernobyl disaster of 1986, dangerously high levels of nuclear contamination escaped into the surrounding area, and nearly 200 towns and villages in Ukraine and neighbouring Belarus were evacuated, including the cities of Pripyat and Chernobyl. The area was so contaminated that many of the evacuees were never permitted to return to their homes. Pripyat is the most famous of these abandoned towns; it was built for the workers of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant and had a population of almost 50,000 at the time of the disaster. Disease and contamination Significant fatality rates from epidemics have produced <P> Dam disaster of 1975 in China. Large amounts of radioactive contamination were spread across Europe due to the Chernobyl disaster, and cesium and strontium contaminated many agricultural products, livestock and soil. The accident necessitated the evacuation of the entire city of Pripyat and of 300,000 people from Kiev, rendering an area of land unusable to humans for an indeterminate period. As radioactive materials decay, they release particles that can damage the body and lead to cancer, particularly cesium-137 and iodine-131. In the Chernobyl disaster, releases of cesium-137 contaminated land. Some communities, including the entire city of Pripyat, were abandoned permanently. One news

The_Donald has a *huge* amount of active users, more than r/TIL, r/pics, r/funny and other default subreddits. There's simply a lot of people browsing it. The second reason is the culture of that subreddit is very, well, "upvote happy". Or 'high energy' as they would call it. In essence, they enjoy covering the frontpage, partly to get their voices out, but also because they know a lot of people don't like that reddit and so being able to "dominate" the frontpage is a win against "the other side" so to speak. Thus, there is great incentive for the userbase to upvote everything remotely interesting, as opposed to just posts that you truly enjoy.

why /r/the_donald posts are consistently dominating /r/all?

<P> a direct violation of site-wide policies regarding spam. In response, Huffman rolled out a change to the r/all algorithm; he noted that r/The_Donald was among several Reddit communities over the years that "attempt to dominate the conversation on Reddit at the expense of everyone else." Ongoing problems with members of the subreddit brigading and harassing other subreddits forced Reddit staff to modify the site's software algorithms to limit the offending posts to the subreddit. The Reddit team introduced r/popular to replace r/all, which included most popular subreddits except for The_Donald, and as a result the subreddit could no longer reach <P> succeed in spreading alternative news to mainstream social networks." They also calculated that r/The_Donald hosted 35.37% of URLs from 54 alternative news sites "like Infowars" on Reddit. Algorithm Through the use of "sticky posts," a moderation function of Reddit that allows selected posts to be artificially placed at the top of a subreddit, the moderators of the forum were "gaming" the algorithms in order to dominate the content on the r/all page, which is a representation of the most popular content on the website. Additionally, users are often apt to flood the website with waves of identical images or posts, <P> was featured in 13 of the top 25 posts on r/all, and gained over 16,000 subscribers during the weekend of the shooting. Meanwhile, r/news lost more than 85,000 subscribers. Due to deliberate manipulation by the forum's moderators and active users, the algorithm that dictated what content reached the r/all page of Reddit resulted in a significant portion of the page being r/The_Donald content. In response, Reddit administrators made changes to its algorithms on June 15, 2016, in an attempt to preserve the variety of r/all. In April 2016, jcm267, the founder of the subreddit, attributed the popularity of the subreddit

is a great source for the science of fabrics. Polyester hadn't been invented yet, so the basis plant, animal fibers were used, but in very, very creative ways. cotton - Levis, seersucker; rayon, wool, silk, felt, jersey, velvet, and of course, the horribly flammable flannel. If you watch the old baseball film of the baseball greats, you'll notice there is not stretch in their uniforms because polyester hadn't been invented yet. They had no "stretch" elastics, etc, which is why they look so baggy. Another source is if you watch old movies on . The actresses' wardrobes are great examples of the creativity of these designers. & #x200B; edit: there was lots of rationing of cotton and wool, because the first priority was, of course, the military for uniforms, blankets, and first aid.

what type of fabric

<P> employed to make shirts and colonial uniforms in Tropical areas due to its incredible breathability. The fabric employed is cotton, and the weave is an English gauze in which two warp yarns are twisted around the weave and around the weft. The weight is between 150 and 250 gr/m2, but the open gauze weave makes it a quite light and breathable fabric that is excellent in presence of harsh climates such that of the Tropics. This fabric has been also employed to produce curtains.” <P> hybrid fabric for the composites industry. <P> is almost always 100% cotton velvet and is dyed in different colours: red, maroon, green.