How the industrial and economic differences of the north and south helped cause the Civil War

How the industrial and economic differences of the north and south helped cause the Civil War Many historians debate the causes of the Civil war. Yet the overwhelming economic differences between the northern and southern states on the eve of the civil war contributed significantly to the growing tensions. The industrial-reliable north had a high support for the implementation of tariffs and objected the use of slave labor, while the agricultural-reliable south strongly opposed tariffs and promoted slavery.The North was very reliable on manufacturing and technological innovation. Environmental conditions in the north did not open opportunity for large plantations, and therefore much of the economy was based on textiles, lumber and fur trade. This reliability on industry put a high demand on tariffs , which would protect the manufactured goods from cheap foreign policies. Although labor was greatly needed, encouragement of immigration caused the northern labor force to be well numbered, since most Europeans worked in the factories and on the railroads in the north, rather than the South.English: Union Regimental Drum Corps from the Amer...The North was also greatly reliable on exporting goods, and therefore supported governmental involvement in making internal improvements, such as roads and railroads.The South, on the other hand, relied heavy on agriculture, more specifically on cotton. In fact, due to England's heavy reliance on American cotton, the South often referred to this economical resource as King Cotton. Not every southern resident owned a farm, and very few owned large farms, but because of the environmental conditions in the south, economy was very reliable on farming, rather than industry or manufacturing. And because of this lack of industry and manufacturing, the South also relied on imports to receive manufactured goods, and therefore objected tariffs, since they only increased the prices of imported goods. Yet these tariffs were the basis of governmental revenue, normally used on financing internal improvements, which explained why the South did not support...

The Fall of Rome

The Fall of Rome From its early days as a monarchy, through the Republic and the Roman Empire, Rome lasted a millennium ... or two. Those who opt for two millennia date the Fall of Rome to 1453 when the Ottoman Turks took Byzantium (Constantinople). Those who opt for one millennium, agree with Roman historian Edward Gibbon. Edward Gibbon dated the Fall to September 4, A.D. 476 when a so-called barbarian named Odoacer (a Germanic leader in the Roman army), deposed the last western Roman emperor, Romulus Augustulus, who was probably partly of Germanic ancestry. Odoacer considered Romulus so paltry a threat he didnt even bother to assassinate him, but sent him into retirement.* The Roman Empire Lasted Beyond the Fall The Byzantine Emperor vs. the Western Emperor:  At the time of the coup and for the two preceding centuries, there had been two emperors of Rome. One lived in the east, usually in Constantinople (Byzantium). The other lived in the west, usually somewhere in Italy, although not necessarily the city of Rome. The emperor whom Odoacer deposed had lived in Ravenna, Italy. Afterwards, there was still one Roman emperor, Zeno, who lived in Constantinople. Odoacer became the first barbarian king of the western empire.The Roman People Lived On:  While this bloodless coup in 476 is a frequently accepted date for the Fall of Rome and the beginning of the Middle Ages, it was not, at the time, a major turning point. Many events and tendencies led up to it and there were many people who continued to think of themselves and who continue to be thought of as Romans.Europes Kingdoms (From the Ashes of the Roman Empire): The following resources relate to the end of the Roman Empire and the Fall of R ome. This includes theories about the Fall of Rome (including lead) and several of the Roman emperors whose actions hastened the end of the Roman Empire in the West. There is a section with information on important men whose origins were far from the city of Rome. Causes of the Fall of Rome Theories on the Fall of Rome Non-Romans Who Impacted the Fall of Rome GothsGoths Origins?Michael Kulikowsky explains why Jordanes, our main source on the Goths, who is himself considered a Goth, should not be trusted.AttilaProfile of Attila, who is known as the Scourge of God.The HunsIn the revised edition of The Huns, E. A. Thompson raises questions about the military genius of Attila the Hun.IllyriaDescendants of the early settlers of the Balkans came into conflict with the Roman Empire.JordanesJordanes, himself a Goth, abridged a lost history of the Goths by Cassiodorus.OdoacerThe barbarian who deposed the emperor of Rome.Sons of NubelSons of Nubel and the Gildonic WarIf the sons of Nubel hadnt been so eager to do away with one another, Africa might have become independent of Rome.StilichoBecause of personal ambition, Praetorian Prefect Rufinus prevented Stilicho from destroying Alaric and the Goths when they had a chance.AlaricAlaric TimelineAlaric didnt want to sack Rome, but he did want a place for his Goths to stay and a suitable title within th e Roman Empire. Although he didnt live to see it, the Goths received the first autonomous kingdom within the Roman Empire. Rome and Romans Fall of Rome Books:  Recommended reading for a modern perspective on the reasons for the fall of Rome.End of the Republic:  Content related to the men and events from the Gracchi and Marius through the turbulent years between Julius Caesars assassination and the start of the principate under Augustus.Why Rome Fell:  476 CE, the date Gibbon used for the fall of Rome based on the fact that it was then that Odoacer deposed the emperor of Rome, is controversial- as are the reasons for the fall.Roman Emperors Leading to the Fall:  You could say Rome was on the verge of falling from the time of its first emperor or you could say Rome fell in 476 CE or 1453, or even that it hasnt yet fallen.   End of the Republic *I think its relevant to point out that the last king of Rome was also not assassinated, but merely expelled. Although ex-king Tarquinius Superbus (Tarquin the Proud) and his Etruscan allies tried to get the throne back by warlike means, Tarquins actual deposition was bloodless, according to the legends the Romans told about themselves.

Extended analysis paper on The Rocking-Horse Winner by D. H. Lawrence Essay

Extended analysis paper on The Rocking-Horse Winner by D. H. Lawrence - Essay Example Early in the story the boy Paul has a talk with his mother about money. But the talk is not the usual mother-son conversation that promotes hard work and ingenuity. The mother advocates the avenue of easy money by the use of luck. She carries the definition a step farther as she blurs the line between money and luck. "Filthy lucre does mean money," said the mother. "But its lucre, not luck" (Lawrence). The use of the words filthy lucre interjects an almost obscene sense of money and wealth. The mother continues her idolization of the character trait of being lucky. She insults Pauls father and says "...its better to be born lucky than rich" (Lawrence). She then tells Paul that his own father is "very unlucky" marking him as a failure as a father and a husband. These images are burned into the mind of Paul at this young age and tempers his value system throughout the rest of his short life. The mother has almost no connection with her husband or family. She occupies the house in body but not in spirit. The household had healthy children and a modest income, yet it was squandered by the mothers view of it. Lawrence describes it as "at the centre of her heart was a hard little place that could not feel love, no, not for anybody". It was love that Paul craved and needed, and it was his mothers love that he would spend the story in search of. Because she was distant and disconnected, she would be easily satisfied with material goods, money, and a lust for it. Paul could sense the emptiness in his mother and her need for a husband, luck, and money. Pauls early attempt at fulfilling his mothers needs, and thus replacing the father, is seen in his early experience on the rocking horse. Lawrence describes Pauls quest to satisfy his mothers need for money, luck, and sexual satisfaction. There is a scene where he is furiously riding his rocking horse striking it with a whip that he had gotten

Geek Love Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Geek Love - Essay Example Degradation oddities mainly lowers lofty spiritual ideal that are correspondingly transferred to the material level, sphere of the universe and body of the prevailing individual unbreakable unity. Moreover, the powerful images of humans within the novel frequently are deformed via eating, drinking, menstruating, having sex, defecating and micturating as in the case of the Binewski offspring conducts. The physical abnormalities are conspicuous in the novel. The embracing moments of the characters of deformities revolves around assets thus depicting the interesting side of Binewskis. Despite Al and Lil resorting to the corresponding dangerous measures to offering themselves with the meal ticket depicts the high level of physical oddities in the novel, which aids in the development of the plot of the geek love (Dunn,pp 123-176). It is cumbersome to acknowledge the degree of the children’s personalities in regard to the influence by the chemicals eaten in the utero and the corresponding outcome of their abnormal upbringing. This depicts that the mental health in the Binewski family in regard to the strong suit is mainly caused by the behaviors of Arty. The novel also opens physical oddities of the Aloysius Binewski and Lilian Hinchcliff Binewski in reminiscing about the period prior to the children implying that she prefer flinging herself into the prevailing pit and bite of the heads off of the chickens. Subsequent to the marriage there exist Fabulon circuses that Al inherits depicting the hatched strategy that mainly breed a family of the bona fide freaks. Lil consume illegal and prescriptions pills, amphetamines, insecticides, and radioisotopes. Moreover, She initially deliver to Arturo the Aqua Boy who mainly flippers for the limbs then preceded by the Electra and the Iphigenia that renowned fringed twins subsequent by the Olympia, the hunchback albino dwarf.

Evolution and religion Essay Example for Free

Evolution and religion Essay â€Å" Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind †, said Albert Einstein. This essay concentrates on evolution, religion, and creationism. In the first phase these are defined, and later their relationships and controversies are discussed. A conclusive statement is made a the end. Evolution The theory of evolution by natural selection was first put forth by Charles Darwin in his book, â€Å" on the origin of species†, in 1859. In 1930’s Darwinian natural selection was combined with Mendelian inheritance to form the modern evolutionary synthesis. With its enormous explanatory power, this theory provides a unifying answer to diversity of life on earth. Evolution is the change in a population’s inherited traits, from generation to generation. These traits are encoded as genes that are copied and passed on to offspring during reproduction. Mutations and other random changes in the genes can produce new or altered traits, resulting in difference between organisms. Evolution occurs when these different traits become more common or rare in a population. This happens through genetic drift and is based on the reproductive value of traits through natural selection. Under natural selection organisms with traits that help them to survive and reproduce tend to have more off springs. In doing so, they will pass more copies of inheritable beneficial traits on to the next generation. This leads to advantageous traits becoming more common in each generation, while disadvantageous traits become rarer. Over time, this process can result in varied adaptations to environmental conditions. As differences in populations accumulate, new species may evolve. All known species have descended from a single ancestral gene pool through this process of gradual divergence. According to theory of evolution, life on Earth started its journey over 3 billion years ago, when oxygenic photosynthesis emerged, which made development of aerobic cellular respiration possible around 2 billion years ago. In the last billion years, multi cellular plants and animals began to appear in oceans. The Cambrian explosion originated all major body plans of modern animals. About 450 million years ago ( mya) plants and fungi colonized the land, and were soon followed by anthropods and other animals. Amphibians first appeared around 300 mya, followed by reptiles and mammals around 200 mya, and birds around 100 mya. The human genus arose around 2 mya, while the earliest modern humans lived 200 thousand years ago. This theory states that all organisms on Earth have descended from a common ancestral gene pool. Evidence for this is inferred from traits shared between all living organisms. In Darwin’s days, this statement was based on visible observation of morphologic similarities. Today genetic science has proved this. For example, every living cell makes use of nucleic acids as its genetic material and uses the same 20 amino acids as the building blocks of proteins. The universality of these traits suggest common ancestry. The roots of evolution theory were laid by Charles Darwin in 1858. He could not propose any working mechanism for inheritance. This was provided by Mendel in 1865, who proved that distinct traits were inherited in a well defined and predictable manner.( Evolution ) Religion A religion is a set of beliefs and practices generally held by human community involving adherence to codified beliefs and rituals, and study of ancestral or cultural traditions, writings, history, mythology, personal faith and mystic experience. It is also described as a communal system for the coherence of belief focusing on a system of thought, unseen being, person, or object, that is considered to be supernatural, sacred, divine or of the highest truth. Moral codes, values, practices, institutions, traditions, rituals and scriptures are often associated with the core belief. Religion is also described as a â€Å" way of life †. There are number of models in which religions come into being and develop. Broadly these models fall into three categories: 1) Those which see religion as social construction 2) Those which see religion as progressing towards higher, objective truth 3) Those which see particular religion as absolute truth Creationism Creationism is the belief that humanity, life, the Earth, and the Universe were entirely created by a supernatural deity, God. His existence is presupposed. The term creationism is often used to describe the belief that creation occurred literally as described in the book ‘ Genesis’, for Christians and the Jews, and in ‘Qur’an’, for Muslims. In Christian context, many creationists adopt a literal interpretation of the Biblical narratives and say that Bible provides a factual account, given from the perspective of only one who was there to witness it at that time: God. Almost all churches teach that God created the Cosmos. Biblical creationism places knowledge of God central in pursuit of knowledge of anything, as everything comes from God. It says nothing about the mechanisms by which anything was created. No systematic or scientific inquiry was made into the validity of the text. Christian creationism id categorized into many types. These are : Young Earth creationism. This is inclusive of modern geocentrism, Omphalos hypothesis, and creation science. Old Earth creationism. This includes Gap creationism, Day-age creationism, and progressive creationism. Theistic creationism Neo-creationism, which includes intelligent design. While Christian and Islamic creationism are almost similar. Hindu creationism believes that all creatures including humans undergo repeated cycles of creation and destruction. The Hindu view of the cosmos is cyclic. ( Creationism ) Evolution and religion Religion is based on beliefs and science is based on proofs and evidences. The theory of evolution is backed by scientific proofs and is considered science beyond any doubt. The relationship between religion and science takes many forms as both are extremely broad. They employ different methods and address different questions. The scientific method adopts an objective approach to measure, calculate, and describe the natural, physical, material universe. Religious methods are more subjective, relying on notions about authority, intuition, belief in supernatural, individual experience and ‘reasoned’ observations about life or the universe, or a combination of all these. Science attempts to answer the ‘how’ and ‘ what’ of observable and verifiable phenomena, religion attempts to answer the ‘why’ question of values, morals, and spirituality. Both employ different methods to find answers to different questions. ( Relationship). A noteworthy dissimilarity between the two is that religion has been existing since ages, whereas science is too young. The earliest civilizations of human species have been worshipping a supernatural force, which was later named as ‘God ’ by Christianity and ‘ Allah’ by Islam. The two most popular religions of today’s world may be a few thousand years old only, but the concept of religion is as old as man himself. In opposition, the modern day science is hardly a few hundred years old. All the modern scientific theories and discoveries on which the world is thriving today, occurred after the renaissance era in Europe. There are two distinct views regarding relationship between religion and science. One known as ‘non-overlapping magisteria’, described by Stephen Jay Gould states that both deal with fundamentally separate aspects of human experience and so when each stays within its own domain, they can co-exist peacefully. The other view known as conflict thesis, which is not to the liking of historians but retains popular appeal, holds that science and religion inevitably compete for authority over the nature of reality. Here, religion has been gradually losing a war with science as scientific expressions become more powerful, acceptable and widespread. ( Relationship ) Evolution theory gives answers to various how life evolved and developed on this earth. Its domain is limited to explaining and proving the existence of a common genetic pool from which different species came into existence. On the other hand the combined domain of all the religions of this world is almost infinite. Answers to questions which science cannot answer are given by religion. The contents of theory of evolution are limited whereas that of all the religions combined are limitless. For example, evolution theory cannot give a satisfactory answer to the origins of universe or the starting point of life. It just assumes that there was a pool of genes from which all forms of life have descended. Religion explains that there exists a supernatural force, which is not seen by anyone and the existence of which can never be proved in a scientific way, which created the ‘ Big Bang’. Science assumes that this was the beginning of universe. Religion does have answers to questions which cannot be answered by any scientific theory. The theory of evolution has no clue about soul, which is globally accepted as a part of our body, while all religions of this world have clear answers to any question regarding soul. All scientific knowledge, if summed up, is like a small drop in an ocean of summed up knowledge offered by all religions on this world. If religion is based on assumptions, even science has assumptions at its base. Evolution is limited to various aspects of life on this planet. For any religion this is a very small chapter in a huge book. Religion not only touches the various aspects of how life developed, but numerous other topics also. As mentioned above, religion is a ‘ way of life’ and hence its perceptions are much broader than the evolution theory, touching the living and the non-living also. Conflicts between religion and evolution arise when religious fundamentalists refuse to accept the scientifically proved facts. This is true for Christian fundamentalists, especially in the United States. They are simply not ready to deviate from the Biblical teachings that God is the creator of all things and He runs the show. They tend to miss one important point that Darwin has never touched the debate on ‘why’ evolution occurred. He has simply found answers to ‘how’ it happened. The authority of God, or for that matter teaching of any religion is never questioned by the theory of evolution. As a matter of fact, there are ample proofs available which convince us that the scientific community also accepts and favors the theory of a super natural power. Writes Lovgren Stefan in his article in National Geographic news, â€Å" Some of history’s greatest scientific minds, including Albert Einstein, were convinced that there is intelligent life behind the universe. Today many scientists say that there is no conflict between their faith and their work†. He further writes, â€Å" the scientific evidence for evolution is overwhelming. Yet, in 2001 Gallup poll, 45% of USA adults said that they believe evolution has played no role in shaping humans. Darwin never said anything about God. Many scientists and theologians maintain that it would be perfectly logical to think that a divine being used evaluation as a method to create the world†. The article further argues , â€Å" there is no way to explain religious faith scientifically. It is hard to envision a test that can tell the difference between the universe created by God, and the one that appeared without God. But why did the universe exist at all ? This is a question which religion is particularly good at answering†. The same article has a report by Ted Sargent, a nano-technology expert at the University of Toronto. â€Å" Even as science progresses in its reductionist fashion moving towards deeper, simpler and more elegant understanding of particles and forces, there will still remain a ‘ why’, at the end. Why are the rules the way they are ? This is where people will find God †. Stefan comments, â€Å" To many scientists, this discoveries may not be that different from religious revelations. Scientific advancements may even draw scientists closer to religion†. ( Lovgren Stefan ) Conversely, religious fundamentalists should also accept the fats which are proven beyond any doubt. This establishes a harmony between religion and evolution. Evolution and creationism The conflict between the believers in evolution theory and creationism is more fierce than that of evolution and religion. This is especially true in the USA where it has become a political controversy. It is a dispute about the origins of Earth, humanity, life, and the universe. The level of support for the evolution theory is overwhelming in the scientific community and the academia, while support for creation based alternatives where evolution does not take place is minimal among secular scientists. Creationists argue that scientific theories are incomplete, incorrect, and inherently flawed due to the infinite regression nature of questions of origins. They argue that if science can provide answers to ‘ what caused the Big Bang ?’ or ‘ what was the nature of first life form ?’ it is likely that answers themselves will be subject to similar kinds of regressive inquiry. They firmly believe that science cannot provide answers to such questions and that their religious discourse is much more complete and more reliable than the naturalistic description provided by science. While creationists point at the limitations of scientific investigations, they intend to point towards the existence of creator God. Skeptics criticize this as ‘God of the gaps argument’. They say that religious argumentation is reduced to a place holder for gaps in human knowledge. One more argument presented is that evolution is a theory and not a fact. This is a result of misconception about the technical meaning of ‘theory’. In common usage, ‘theory’ means hypothesis and unproven assumptions. In science it means ‘ a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena†. Exploring this issue, Stephen Jay Gould wrote, â€Å" Evolution is a theory. It is also a fact, and facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing uncertainty. Facts are the world’s data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein’s theory of gravitation replaced that of Newton’s but apples did not suspend themselves from mid –air. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin’s proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be disclosed â€Å". Karl Propper gave a new dimension to the debate, by evolving the concept of ‘falsifiability’. He claimed that testable theories are scientific but those that are untestable are not. He declares, â€Å" I have come to a conclusion that Darwinism is not testable scientific theory but a metaphysical research program, a plausible framework for testable scientific theories†. Debate among some scientists and philosophers of science on the applicability of falsifiabilty have been offered by some scientists: Richard Dawkins and J.B.S. Haldane both pointed out that if fossil rabbits were found in the Precarribean era, a time before most similarly complex life forms had evolved â€Å" that would completely blow evolution out of water†. Creationists have criticized the scientific evidence used to support evolution as being based on faulty assumptions and unjustified jumping to conclusions. These include: the fossil fuel record which has significant gaps that cast doubt on evolution the emergence of new species which has not been observed directly radiometric dating which is inaccurate due to an inappropriate reliance on assumption of uniformitarianism While creationists claim that the problems they point out represent significant ‘holes’ in evolutionary theory. Supporters of evolutionary theory respond by arguing that these gaps of knowledge do not cast doubt on the framework the theory of evolution provides, asserting that they indicate either areas where research needs to be directed or there is misunderstanding on the part of creationists. As a matter of fact scientists and subject experts of evolution, do not spend much time on refuting the charges of creationists. Many do not respond at all. They do not think it is worth it. After all, when they reply, creationists get the publicity. ( creation-evolution controversy ) Pope Benedict XVI , in a book titled â€Å" creation and evolution†, published on 11 April 2007, states that â€Å" The question is not to either make a decision for a creationism that fundamentally excludes science, or for an evolutionary theory that covers over its own gaps and does not want to see the questions that reach beyond the methodological possibilities of natural science. I find it important to underline that theory of evolution implies questions that must be to philosophy and which themselves lead beyond the realms of science. It is also true that the theory of evolution is not a complete, scientifically proven theory†. He believes that experiment in a controlled environment h as limitations, as, â€Å" We cannot have 10,000 generations into the laboratory†. He also does not endorse creationism or intelligent design. He defends ‘ theistic evolution’, a reconciliation between science and religion, already held by Catholics. He writes on evolution, as a ‘ process itself is rational despite the mistakes and confusion as it goes through a narrow corridor, choosing a few mutations and using low probability. This inevitably leads to a question that goes beyond science- where did this rationality come from ? † to which he answers that it comes from the ‘creative reason’ of God. ( creationism – evolution controversy) Third alternative The conflict and controversy over evolution and creationism can be resolved if a third alternative is adopted. If biology had followed Pasteur’s paradigm, instead of Darwin’s, and if the theory of cosmic ancestry was prevailing today, then the mechanical theory of nature would account for the evolutionary progress and the origin of life on Earth. There would be no need for supernatural intervention. Cosmic ancestry is fundamentally different from both Darwinism and prevailing western religions. Both hold that life arises and evolves from simpler beginnings. Darwinism explains this with material causes, western religions with supernatural causes. In Cosmic Ancestry life neither arises nor evolves to more highly organized forms from simpler beginnings. With material causes life can descend from prior life at least as highly evolved as itself. Thus in Cosmic Ancestry, life only descends. The fact is that neither science nor religion seem interested in adopting Cosmic Ancestry as an alternative. ( Evolution versus creationism) Conclusion The theory of evolution proves how life originated and developed on this Earth. It has a scientific base in all its claims. It is a result of careful analysis of data. All over the world it has been accepted as a ‘truly scientific explanation’ on evolution of life. It does not have to do anything with any supernatural power. Religious fundamentalists, specially Christian, have evolved a movement called ‘creationism’, which asserts that the theory of evolution tends to wipe off the Biblical teachings and the faith they have in God. Till today, the highest priest of Christianity, the Pope, is busy trying to find ‘holes’ in the theory of evolution, when the whole world has accepted this theory before 150 years. The paradox is that evolution has never touched upon the aspects of God. In fact, scientists also believe in God and accept His existence. There is no legitimate base for ‘creationism’, and it reflects the sense of adamancy among the Christian fundamentalists. Theory of Cosmic Ancestry can be adopted as an option. Works- cited page 1. Evolution, wikipedia the free encyclopedia, 14 April 07, Retrieved on 15 April 07 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution 2. Creationism, wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, 14 April 07, Retrieved on 15 April 07 from : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism 3. Relationship, Relationship between Religion and science, wikipedia the free encyclopedia, 12 April 07, Retrieved on 15 April 07 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relationship_between_religion_and_science 4. Lovgren Stefan, Evolution and religion can co-exist, scientists say, National Geographic News, 18 October 2004, Retrieved on 15 April 07, from: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/1018_041018_science_religion.html 5. Creation-evolution controversy, wikipedia the free encyclopedia, 13 April 07, Retrieved on 15 April 07 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creation-evolution_controversy 6. Evolution versus creationism, Retrieved on 16 April 07 from: http://www.panspermia.org/mechansm.ht m

Physics Essay -- Steer Wrestling Science Papers

Physics You can find a law of physics in everything that you do. It does not matter if you are doing complex scientific experiments, working as a laborer in a field, or enjoying your favorite pastime, you are involved in putting the laws of physics to work. I will try to demonstrate this as I discuss the laws of physics that are involved in my favorite pastime, which is steer wrestling. The art of steer wrestling is complex and simple all at the same time. To start, let’s define what exactly steer wrestling is. Steer wrestling is a rodeo event that is also known as bull dogging. This is the event where there are two mounted cowboys that run along the side of a steer. When they get close to the steer the cowboy on the left hand side climbs off onto the back of the steer, grabbing the steer by the horns. Keep in mind if you will that both the cowboys on the horses and the steer are running at full speeds while this dismounting is taking place. Once the cowboy has the steer by the horns, the cowboy must change the steer’s direction and wrestle him to the ground. Since this is a rodeo event and a competition, you have to do all of the above as fast as you can. Steer wrestling is a timed event that is started when the steer leaves the chute, and ends when the steer is lying on its side with all four feet facing the same direction. Now that we know what steer wrestling is, let’s tie it in with a couple of things that deal with physics. As I already mentioned above, the first step is crawling off of a horse that is running full speed onto the back of a cow that is traveling at its full speed as well. Any time you have masses traveling at speeds you have momentum. We will first discuss momentum and the changes in momentum th... ...ipetal force, and torque are just a couple of the many aspects of physics involved in this process. I believe that the use and understanding of physics can help in understanding why things work better then others, and how to be a more successful steer wrestler. A specific example is the fact that I now am more aware of where I locate my hands on a steer’s horn, and also I am more conscience is trying to be the center of mass. By being able to do this, I have taken my performance to a higher level and can back good ideas with proof from science. Bibliography 1.Kirkpatrick, Larry D. Wheeler, Gerald F. Physics: A World View. (Fourth Edition). Hartcourt, Inc. 2001. 2.Spence, Mike. â€Å"A Cowboy For All Eras† ProRodeo Sports News. 30 April, 2003. 3.Benton Franklin Fair & Rodeo. Steer Wrestling. 20 August, 2002. http://www.bffairrodeo.com/rodeo/steerwrestling.html

The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz

John McPherson, which resulted in his wife getting out of bed and unfortunately causing her death. The next day at school, Mr. John McPherson shows up under the influence of alcohol, completely drunk and starts to insult the Jews and making extremely racist comments. This is Just a small example of Anti-Semitism during Duddys childhood. Another idea I found important in the text was selfishness as well as ambition and greed. Even though Duddy was making more money than a 17 year old should, he always wanted more.Nothing was more important to him than making money. When he heard that the last piece of land in Lac St. Pierre was up for sale, he took all the money he had, but still came up short. Duddy decides to forge a cheque from Virgil's chequebook. Virgil was a man who Duddy met in New York and helped him make money illegally by smuggling pinball machines. After Virgil and Yvette found out about what Duddy had done to them, they never spoke to him again. Discuss the author's style. Describe 2 iterary elements the author uses successfully and give a clear example of each. The author used a few techniques to deepen our understanding of the story. One of the techniques was using a teenager as the main character of the novel. I think this showed us the ambition of the young man because all teenagers want to make money and dream about becoming rich one day, but it's not all 17 year olds that want it as bad as Duddy Kravitz. Another technique used by the author was making the main character a Jew.As we all know, Jews have a reputation for wanting money so ad and I think that the fact that Duddy is Jewish makes the whole story about a young man chasing money more meaningful. Did you enjoy the book? Why or why not? I enjoyed this novel a lot and recommend it to everyone living in Montreal and who likes a story that may have many things in common with their own personal lives. I think it is an important part of Montreal history in our generation. I also think it's good for Jewish people to read this novel because we also see how racism has stronger racism against Jews was in the 1940s