Meaning of Life and Jeremy Fink Essay Example for Free

Meaning of Life and Jeremy Fink Essay A) MEANING OF LIFE – BY JEREMY FINK. B) CHARACTERS: JEREMY FINK, LIZZY MULDOON, MRS. FINK, MR. MULDOON, MR. OSWALD, SAMANTHA AND RICK, JAMES AND MR. FINK. CONFLICT: THE CONFLICT IS ABOUT JEREMY TRYING TO FIND FOUR KEY’S THAT WOULD OPEN THE BOX WHICH HIS DAD LEFT IT FOR HIM FOR HIS THIRTEEN BIRTHDAY PRESENT WHEN HE DIED AND JEREMY IS TO FIND THE KEY THAT WOULD FIT ALL FOUR SPOTS IN THE BOX BEFORE HIS THIRTEEN BIRTHDAY. SETTING: HAPPENS IN MODERN DAYS IN NEW YORK CITY. BASIC SITUATION: JEREMY AND LIZZY TRY TO FIND THE KEY BEFORE JEREMY’S THIRTEEN BIRTHDAY. C) PLOT: JEREMY SEE’S THE POSTMAN WITH A BOX ADDRESSED TO HIS MOM. JEREMY TAKES THE BOX AND OPENS IT TO SEE A BOX. WHEN HIS MOM COMES AND SEES HIM WITH THE BOX HIS MOM TELLS HIM HOW THE BOX WAS HIS PRESENT HIS DAD LEFT HIM FOR HIS THIRTEEN BIRTHDAY AND HAD TO FIND ALL FOUR OF THE KEYS THAT WOULD OPEN IT BEFORE HIS BIRTHDAY COMES. LIZZY AND JEREMY GET IN TROUBLE AND THEY HAVE TO DO COMMUNITY SERVICE. THEN THEY MEET MR. OSWALD WHO TRIES TO HELP THEM. THEIR COMMUNITY SERVICE WAS TO DELIVER STAFF TWO NEW PEOPLE WHICH THEN THEY GET TO MEET NEW PEOPLE. D) CLIMAX: IS WHEN LIZZY AND JEREMY OPENED THE BOX AND DISCOVERED HIS. FATHER’S MEANING OF LIFE. E) FALLING ACTION: IS WHEN JEREMY OPENS THE BOX AND FINDS IT FULL OF STONES. JEREMY THEN REMEMBERS HIS FATHER HAD COLLECTED EACH STONE AT EACH IMPORTANT EVENT OF HIS LIFE. F) RESOLUTION: IS WHEN JEREMY FIND OUT THAT MR. OSWALD, JEREMY’S MOM, THE MAILMAN, AND LARRY FROM LARRY’S LOCKS WERE ALL IN JEREMY’S DAD’S PLAN TO GIVE JEREMY THE BOX AT THE RIGHT TIME AND SO THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK FOR ALL FOUR OF THE KEYS, ALTHOUGH MR. OSWALD HAD THEM ALL ALONG. BY HAVING THIS PLAN HIS DAD KNEW THAT JEREMY WOULD MEET NEW PEOPLE AND GET TO EXPERIENCE. DIFFERENT THINGS HE WOULD NEVER DO. G) POINT OF VIEW: FIRST PERSON BECAUSE THERE IS TOO MUCH FEELINGS AND EMOTION IN THE BOOK. H) PERSON VS PERSON- JEREMY AND LIZZY AS THEY TRY TO FIND THE KEYS TO THE BOX. PERSON VS SOCIETY- JEREMY AND THE SOCIETY MEETING NEW PEOPLE TO TRY TO FIND THE KEY TO THE FOUR HOLES. I) THEME: A LESSON THIS STORY TEACHES ABOUT LIFE IS TO NEVER GIVE UP, AND ALWAYS BE MOTIVATED TO DO SOMETHING YOU KNOW YOU REALLY WANT TO DO. J) SIMILE- AS HARD AS IT CAN BE WITH HOPE ON THE WAY. SIMILE- LIFE IS AS EVENTFUL AS A JOURNEY. METAPHOR- NO PAIN, NO GAIN.

How Fish Swim Essay -- physics fish swimming

Water and all forms of water travel have long fascinated man. With his fascination and the realization that humans are ill-suited for water travel that doesn't involve remaining on the surface, an appreciation for a fish's ability to move in three dimensions with relative ease was also devloped. Although we may not fully understand the physics involved how fish swim, it is obvious from the fascination and the breadth of reseach that it will remain a goal of the modern sicientist. A fish's ability to propel itself efficiently through water is paramount to its likelihood to succeed. But before a fish need worry about any of the complications associated with moving through water (hydrodynamic drag, turbulence, buoyancy, etc.) it must first solve the problem of locomotion. The most common method for solving this problem is by muscle contraction and relaxation. The forward thrust force is created by movement of the caudal (tail) fin and varying amounts of the surrounding muscle (up to the entire body for fish that swim similar to eels) in an undulating motion. The importance of this mechanism manifests itself in the fact that 80% of a fish's body is composed of muscle used for propulsion and maneuvering. Since fish live in an environment in which they need to move in three dimensions, buoyancy plays a significant role in determining a fish's ability to swim efficiently. Fish use a couple of different strategies to solve this problem. Denser fish use their pectoral fins to create dynamic lift, similar to planes and birds. As these fish swim, their pectoral fins are positioned in such a way as to create a difference in pressure which allows the fish to maintain a certain depth. The two major drawbacks of ... ... Anjem and Marko, John. University of Illinois, Chicago. Department of Physics http://www.uic.edu/classes/phys/phys461/phys450/MARKO/N004.html Smits, A. "Drag of Blunt and Streamline Bodies" Princeton University. Department of Engineering http://www.princeton.edu/~asmits/Bicycle_web/blunt.html Moore, Bobby and Warren, Michael. "The Bouyancy of Fish and the Physics Behind it" http://kingfish.coastal.edu/physics/projects/2000_fall/fish/ Tu, Xiaoyuan. "Structure of the Dynamic Fish Model". University of Toronto http://www.dgp.toronto.edu/people/tu/thesis/node50.html

Lincoln-Douglas

The significance of the Lincoln-Douglas debates for the political history of America is hard to overestimate. Therefore, careful analysis of these debates can be extremely educational and enlightening. This paper will focus on three main aspects of the analysis, namely the causes of the debates, the content of the debates, and the results of the debates. The Lincoln-Douglas debates were a series of seven debates during the Illinois senatorial race of 1858 between Republican Abraham Lincoln and the Democratic incumbent, Stephen A. Douglas. The candidates were sharply divided on the issue of slavery. Before Lincoln announced a formal challenge, the candidates spoke in turn in the cities of Chicago and Springfield. Thus, Lincoln suggested speaking to the same audiences at one time by writing the following to Douglas: ‘Will it be agreeable to you†¦to make an arrangement for you and myself to divide time, and address the same audiences during the present canvass?’ (Encarta, 2007, para. 3). Scrutinizing the social and political circumstances at the time of the election campaign, it is necessary to note the Kansas-Nebraska Act, sponsored by Douglas, allowing slavery in the U.S. territories north of latitude 36 °30†² if there citizens agreed to it, and the U.S. Supreme Court Dred Scott decision of 1857, allowing masters to bring slaves into free territory without any alterations in the legal status of a slave. Therefore, the Supreme Court Dred Scott decision entered into a contradiction with the Kansas-Nebraska Act (Encarta, 2007). As for the content of the debate, Lincoln’s main focus was the human rights issue implicitly present in the debate on slavery. He told the audience that slavery violated the Declaration of Independence and was firmly determined to portray the practice of slavery as evil and immoral. For his part, Douglas paid considerable attention to legal technicalities, such as the principle of ‘popular sovereignty’ under which inhabitants were able to decide whether they would accept slavery in their territory (Encarta, 2007). However, this principle ‘with its self-proclaimed neutrality toward whether slavery was voted up or voted down, was a sheer absurdity on its face, according to Lincoln’ (Jaffa, 1999, p. 31). Lincoln employed all his rhetorical skills to prove the moral and ethical unacceptability of slavery. He also perceived the sharp division over the issue of slavery as a threat to national unity. When accepting his nomination, he said the following phrase: ‘A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this Government cannot endure permanently half-slave and half-free’ (University of Houston, 2008, para. 4). He also argued that the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Supreme Court's Dred Scott decision were a part of conspiracy aimed at legalizing slavery in the entire territory of the United States. Douglas, in turn, focused on the right to self-government, which he saw as being of preeminent importance. However, as the debates progressed, Douglas started to clash Lincoln’s position directly and accused him of favoring black Americans over whites. He ended up picturing his opponent as a radical politician inciting tension and possible civil war. Lincoln denied this and voiced his support for the Fugitive Slave Law and the existence of slavery in the territories where such practice had been already established. The issue of slavery was debated in the light of the prospect of granting citizenship to black Americans. Douglas was fiercely opposed to such a notion, while Lincoln took the middle ground by recognizing black citizens’ right to life, liberty, and economic freedom while being wary about the acceptability of ‘bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races’ (University of Houston, 2008, para. 10). The two candidates also had opposing views on the institutional nature of slavery. Douglas was convinced that slavery could not exist without the support of friendly local legislation and was essentially a dying practice. Thus, his suggestion was to treat it as a local problem to be decided by inhabitants of a certain territory. Local residents, in his view, could de facto outlaw this practice by refusing to pass legislation protecting property right of slave owners: ‘Slavery cannot exist a day or an hour anywhere†¦unless it is supported by local police regulations’ (University of Houston, 2008, para. 12). On the contrary, Lincoln believed that slavery, with its status undecided, had a potential of spreading quickly on the nationwide scale. As concerns the results of the race, Lincoln lost it, yet, in his own words, it was ‘a slip and not a fall’ (University of Houston, 2008, para. 15). Lincoln’s popularity was boosted greatly by the series of debates, which, in turn, contributed to his victory in the Presidential race of 1860. However, the debates had far-reaching implications by attracting public attention to the issues of slavery and human rights as well as establishing the tradition of formal debates between candidates for a governmental post. References Jaffa, Harry V. (1999). Crisis of the House Divided: An Interpretation of the Issues in the Lincoln-Douglas Debates, Revised Ed. Chicago: University Of Chicago Press. Microsoft Encarta Online Encyclopedia. (2007). ‘Lincoln-Douglas Debates.’ Retrieved January 20, 2008, from http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_1741500415/Lincoln_Douglas_Debates.html University of Houston. (2008). ‘The Lincoln-Douglas Debates.’ Retrieved January 20, 2008, from http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=336  Ã‚  Ã‚     

Italian Verbs Arrivare Conjugations

arrivare: to arrive, come (to), reach, succeed (in), manage, happen, occur Regular  first-conjugation Italian verbIntransitive verb (does not take a  direct object) Indicative/Indicativo Presente io arrivo tu arrivi lui, lei, Lei arriva noi arriviamo voi arrivate loro, Loro arrivano Imperfetto io arrivavo tu arrivavi lui, lei, Lei arrivava noi arrivavamo voi arrivavate loro, Loro arrivavano Passato Remoto io arrivai tu arrivasti lui, lei, Lei arriv noi arrivammo voi arrivaste loro, Loro arrivarono Futuro Semplice io arriver tu arriverai lui, lei, Lei arriver noi arriveremo voi arriverete loro, Loro arriveranno Passato Prossimo io sono arrivato/a tu sei arrivato/a lui, lei, Lei arrivato/a noi siamo arrivati/e voi siete arrivati/e loro, Loro sono arrivati/e Trapassato Prossimo io ero arrivato/a tu eri arrivato/a lui, lei, Lei era arrivato/a noi eravamo arrivati/e voi eravate arrivati/e loro, Loro erano arrivati/e Trapassato Remoto io fui arrivato/a tu fosti arrivato/a lui, lei, Lei fu arrivato/a noi fummo arrivati/e voi foste arrivati/e loro, Loro furono arrivati/e Future Anteriore io sar arrivato/a tu sarai arrivato/a lui, lei, Lei sar arrivato/a noi saremo arrivati/e voi sarete arrivati/e loro, Loro saranno arrivati/e Subjunctive/Congiuntivo Presente io arrivi tu arrivi lui, lei, Lei arrivi noi arriviamo voi arriviate loro, Loro arrivino Imperfetto io arrivassi tu arrivassi lui, lei, Lei arrivasse noi arrivassimo voi arrivaste loro, Loro arrivassero Passato io sia arrivato/a tu sia arrivato/a lui, lei, Lei sia arrivato/a noi siamo arrivati/e voi siate arrivati/e loro, Loro siano arrivati/e Trapassato io fossi arrivato/a tu fossi arrivato/a lui, lei, Lei fosse arrivato/a noi fossimo arrivati/e voi foste arrivati/e loro, Loro fossero arrivati/e Conditional/Condizionale Presente io arriverei tu arriveresti lui, lei, Lei arriverebbe noi arriveremmo voi arrivereste loro, Loro arriverebbero Passato io sarei arrivato/a tu saresti arrivato/a lui, lei, Lei sarebbe arrivato/a noi saremmo arrivati/e voi sareste arrivati/e loro, Loro sarebbero arrivati/e Imperative/Imperativo Presente arriva arrivi arriviamo arrivate arrivino Infinitive/Infinito Presente arrivare Passato essere arrivato Participle/Participio Presente arrivante Passato arrivato Gerund/Gerundio Presente arrivando Passato essendo arrivato