Cicso Systems vs Huawei Technologies :: Lawsuit Law Intellectual Property Essays

Cicso Systems vs Huawei Technologies I. Cisco Systems files lawsuit against Huawei Technologies Cisco Systems filed a lawsuit against Huawei Technologies on January 23, 2003 claiming that Huawei had copied, misappropriated, and infringed on Cisco’s intellectual property in its rival line of low-cost networking routers.1 Cisco Systems is an industry leader in providing networking equipment for voice and data transfer. Huawei Technologies is China’s leading manufacturer of telecom and network equipment gear and is viewed by analysts as a formidable competitor to Cisco2. II. Details of the lawsuit Cisco’s allegations include the following:3 . Copying of IOS source code: IOS (Internetworking Operating System) is Cisco’s proprietary operating system. Cisco claims that Huawei’s operating system contains text strings, file names, and even bugs that are identical to those in Cisco’s IOS source code. . Copying of Cisco’s technical documentation: Cisco alleges that whole portions of text from Cisco’s copyrighted technical documentation are found in Huawei’s user manuals for their Quidway routers and switches. . Copying of Command Line Interface: A Command Line Interface (CLI) is the interface through which a user issues commands to a router. Cisco claims that extensive portions of its CLI and help screens appear verbatim in Huawei’s operating system for its Quidway routers and switches. . Patent infringement: Cisco alleges that Huawei is infringing at least five Cisco patents related to proprietary routing protocols. Cisco wants a preliminary and permanent injunction prohibiting the use, sales, marketing, and distribution of Huawei’s Quidway routers and switches. The suit includes an order to triple all damages, an amount to be determined by a jury during a trial.4 Cisco also took action against a Huawei distributor in the United Kingdom. Spot Distribution received a cease and desist letter for distributing Huawei products that allegedly infringe Cisco’s intellectual property.5 Cisco filed the case in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas,6 nearby Plano, Texas, where it has a subsidiary. The court is reputed to be knowledgeable about patent and intellectual property infringement cases, sympathetic to patent holders, and quick to issue injunctions. While patents granted in the United States are only enforceable in the United States, copyright laws are enforced worldwide.

Absurdity: An Essay On The Stranger :: essays research papers

An Essay on†¦ The Stranger; The Absurd "One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them, One Ring to bring them all And in the Darkness bind them" (Lord of the Rings Volume II, The Council of Elrond) Within the Stranger, Albert Camus brought up many questions and a few answers. He created an outsider to society and showed us how he lived, Meursault. Meursault was always indifferent. Meursault accepted death. Why? Meursault saw the purpose of life meaningless. That is â€Å"Absurdity†! Absurdity, how does that word sound? Pretty bad, eh? Absurdity when used like â€Å"that’s absurd!† gives the feeling of negative judgment and a sense of finality. The idea of the Absurd seems to attach itself with meaningless, pointless and other such words that express a destination but without the means to get there and vice versa means but no destination. So from there I inferred that Camus does not believe in God nor any high law or universal law that are associated with a divinity, which is a path in life (either the means or the destination). So what is Absurd? The Absurd is living, a quest to find the meaning of anything within a reality with no purpose. Reality has no purpose because there is no high law, a universal law nor a God. Therefore this reality must be randomness. I believe that Camus wants us to see thi s and begin questioning our existence. So he wants he wants us to see the Absurdity and to cope with the Absurdity. If there is no point to living why do we continue to live? If this reality is absurd why don’t we recognize that and commit suicide? Taking one’s life shows the lack of will or reasons to live and also the needlessness of suffering. So what is living? Living is the Absurd. Living is hopelessness. Living is keeping the absurd alive. To keep the absurd alive you only have to live the absurd. 'Life will be more fully lived in so far as it has no meaning.' is a quote from Camus that shows this. Camus shows that you can â€Å"hope† for the best without hope. â€Å"Hope† is not the same as hope. â€Å"Hope† is optimism. Freedom from hope is freedom to your soul. You can no longer hurt yourself by living. It is hard to believe that being hopeless leads to living but living is an imprisonment. We try to be the best we can be but does not life limit us?

Bartleby, the Scrivener Essay

The nameless narrator of the story starts off by introducing Bartleby to the readers as â€Å"strange†: But I waive the biographies of all other scriveners for a few passages in the life of Bartleby, who was a scrivener the strangest I ever saw or heard of (Melville 546). Throughout the entire story, the lawyer will go through numerous thought processes where he tries to reflect and explain why Bartleby is the way that he is but the lawyer never succeeds. We see that the narrator judges Bartleby not based on his limited knowledge of him but exactly because he knows nothing of Bartleby. He is strange because the narrator has never met anyone quite like him – bizarre, unyielding and utterly devoid of human emotions. He tries to pre-empt any true understanding Bartleby by justifying this young man’s strange behavior to himself. Perhaps this is because of the frustration of many attempts to try and reach out to the pale scrivener that ended up dismissed by an answer of â€Å"I prefer not to do so†. In the end, he just lets everything go with a rumor and a prayer. In the narrator’s first encounter with Bartleby, he would describe his impression is that of a true gentleman. In his mind, the narrator would compare the new copyist-to-be to the two presently employed copyists, Turkey and Nippers. In direct contrast to the two very colorful and volatile individuals, Bartleby was something novel. He was quiet, neat, and for some reason, he is described in their first meeting as forlorn. In answer to my advertisement, a motionless young man one morning, stood upon my office threshold, the door being open, for it was summer. I can see that figure now–pallidly neat, pitiably respectable, incurably forlorn! It was Bartleby (Melville 549). That Bartleby should be â€Å"motionless† further indicates Bartleby’s remove from the sphere of common humanity–in contrast to the activity and emotions of the lawyer and his employees, Bartleby is still, lacking in vitality and emotion, thing-like. He is not a â€Å"who,† but rather a â€Å"what† left like a basket on the lawyer’s doorstep. His motionlessness and thing-like nature is reinforced by the passivity of the construction â€Å"it was Bartleby.† (Weinstock) Although Bartleby’s manner suggests unhappiness or discontent, he never actually expresses any emotion in the entire story (Napierkowski). This character trait was merely attributed to him by the lawyer. Perhaps the narrator associates happiness with excitement and emotional outbursts that were characteristic of Turkey and Nippers. Some commentaries seem to suggest this. Throughout the whole story, the narrator’s impressions of Bartleby would be very eclectic. At first, the lawyer was impressed with how Bartleby worked so quickly without being distracted. The boy would work long hours and never have any need for breaks even for dinner. At this point, there was no reason for alarm. Bartleby did as he was told without any complaints. He was like a mechanized copy machine in an era where people had to copy their own documents manually. This was very advantageous in the lawyer’s line of work. However, in time the lawyer would be anxious about the bleakness and inhumanness of how Bartleby did his work. He was bankrupt of any emotions – never smiling – never engaging in conversation with his co-workers. At first Bartleby did an extraordinary quantity of writing. As if long famishing for something to copy, he seemed to gorge himself on my documents. There was no pause for digestion. He ran a day and night line, copying by sun-light and by candle-light. I should have been quite delighted with his application, had be been cheerfully industrious. But he wrote on silently, palely, mechanically (Melville 550). The conflict would arise the first time Bartleby refuses to check the documents he made for errors. This came as a shock to the lawyer because he was always with the understanding that he was the employer and Bartleby was the employee and as such, Bartleby had to follow his every bidding with regards to his official duties. Apparently, for the old lawyer, this behavior was unheard of for employees in his line of work. I looked at him steadfastly. His face was leanly composed; his gray eye dimly calm. Not a wrinkle of agitation rippled him. Had there been the least uneasiness, anger, impatience or impertinence in his manner; in other words, had there been any thing ordinarily human about him, doubtless I should have violently dismissed him from the premises. But as it was, I should have as soon thought of turning my pale plaster-of-paris bust of Cicero out of doors. I stood gazing at him awhile, as he went on with his own writing, and then reseated myself at my desk. This is very strange, thought I (Melville 550). The narrator thought that any other time and with any other person, he would have been outraged. But Bartleby’s passivity and serenity caught him off guard. Again, he would describe Bartleby as someone who was not ordinary. From his first refusal, the lawyer has placed Bartleby outside the realm of human possibilities. By his own admission, our narrator, a man of â€Å"virtuous expediency,† has been â€Å"strangely disarmed,† â€Å"touched and disconcerted† (Davis 183). He was confused about what to do with this odd copyist. He decided to just let it go for the moment and let the other two employees work on the examination. Many of these refusals would follow. Bartleby’s disobedience had no hint of resistance or rebellion. His responses were given merely as a matter of fact and this left the lawyer â€Å"unmanned†. Also, these were not mere mechanical or automatic refusals. According to the lawyer, Bartleby seemed to thoughtfully consider the requests before turning them down. †¦ It seemed to me that while I had been addressing him, he carefully revolved every statement that I made; fully comprehended the meaning; could not gainsay the irresistible conclusion; but, at the same time, some paramount consideration prevailed with him to reply as he did (Melville 551). Bartleby apparently had no life outside the office. The only thing he knew was work and he never stopped working. They never saw him out of the office (until he was forced out) and they never asked him why. At this point in time, they were allowing the status quo to remain just as long as no real trouble would ensue. Some days passed, the scrivener being employed upon another lengthy work. His late remarkable conduct led me to regard his way narrowly. I observed that he never went to dinner; indeed that he never went any where. As yet I had never of my personal knowledge known him to be outside of my office. He was a perpetual sentry in the corner (Melville 551). There were several occasions when the lawyer would refer to Bartleby as property or valuable acquisition. As much as he wanted to get rid of the unexplainable employee, he was proving to be an asset. He was predictable, he worked very hard and he never had to stop. This dehumanization does not help him at all to understand the poor boy. This revealed the darker side of the narrator – the human side. As days passed on, I became considerably reconciled to Bartleby. His steadiness, his freedom from all dissipation, his incessant industry (except when he chose to throw himself into a standing revery behind his screen), his great stillness, his unalterableness of demeanor under all circumstances, made him a valuable acquisition (Melville 553). xxx It was rather weak in me I confess, but his manner on this occasion nettled me. Not only did there seem to lurk in it a certain disdain, but his perverseness seemed ungrateful, considering the undeniable good usage and indulgence he had received from me (Melville 555). This is another instance confirming the fact that Bartleby never went anywhere except the office. The lawyer discovered this later when he visited his office one Sunday when all other people were either at church or gathering for the recently concluded elections. He found that Bartleby was making his home in the same place where he worked. At this point, the lawyer felt sorry for Bartleby even if he was far from understanding this enigmatic fellow. Think of it. Of a Sunday, Wall-street is deserted as Petra; and every night of every day it is an emptiness. This building too, which of week-days hums with industry and life, at nightfall echoes with sheer vacancy, and all through Sunday is forlorn. And here Bartleby makes his home; sole spectator of a solitude which he has seen all populous–a sort of innocent and transformed Marius brooding among the ruins of Carthage! (Melville 553) After many other disagreements and stoic refusals, the lawyer would lose his patience with Bartleby and move his business to a different location, leaving Bartleby behind. Later on, Bartleby would turn out to be an inconvenience to the new tenants of the lawyer’s previous office. He would come to Bartleby’s rescue first with compassion by trying to explain to him that he had to leave and that he will be given employment somewhere else. Once again, the lawyer is frustrated by Bartleby’s stubbornness and disinterest in the otherwise attractive proposals of his former employer. The occupants of the office would have Bartleby arrested and locked up in jail. When the lawyer hears about this, he would immediately go to visit Bartleby. The lawyer then asks the jail personnel to be good to Bartleby because he is a good man no matter how strange he may be: The same day I received the note I went to the Tombs, or to speak more properly, the Halls of Justice. Seeking the right officer, I stated the purpose of my call, and was informed that the individual I described was indeed within. I then assured the functionary that Bartleby was a perfectly honest man, and greatly to be compassionated, however unaccountably eccentric (Melville 613). In describing Bartleby, the lawyer is actually revealing more of himself. He is revealing his biases and prejudices. He is revealing his materialism, pride and compassion. He reveals different aspects of his personality while Bartleby displays nothing at all. Some writers describe â€Å"Bartleby, the Scrivener† as a story wracked with Christian symbols and yet it falls short of Messianic value. Indeed, Melville’s story would seem to be a parody of the parable, as we see a self-professed â€Å"saved† Christian attempt the good deeds of the Biblical Samaritan but, ironically, still fall short of Christ’s â€Å"divine† injunction, spiritually hampered by his self-justifying, earthbound prudence. (Doloff 357). The lawyer was a good man who honestly wanted to help Bartleby. The was never unkind to Bartleby even in the times of his gravest impatience. However, it was his earthly prudence that kept bringing him back to rationalizing the situation in terms of how it would benefit him. His feelings for Bartleby undergo several changes in this short story. He would begin with curiosity, followed by amazement, then impatience, compassion, disgust, and finally friendship. This was a story about the limits of human understanding and compassion. That no matter how little the narrator truly knew about Bartleby, it was the fact that they were â€Å"sons of Adam† that created this instant connection and invokes true compassion. In the end, Bartleby was no longer a novelty or an object of fascination. The narrator would refer to him as a â€Å"friend†. Works Cited Melville, Herman. â€Å"Bartleby, the Scrivener.† Putnam’s monthly magazine of American literature, science and art Volume 2, Issue 11((Nov. 1853)): 546-550; 609-616. â€Å"Bartleby the Scrivener.† Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. 12 Jul 2006, 08:37 UTC. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. 14 Aug 2006 . â€Å"Bartleby the Scrivener, A Tale of Wall Street: Bartleby.† Short Stories for Students. Ed. Marie Rose Napierkowski. Vol. 3. Detroit: Gale, 1998. eNotes.com. January 2006. 14 August 2006. . Johnson, Claudia Durst. â€Å"Bartleby the Scrivener.† Grolier Multimedia Encyclopedia. 2006. Grolier Online. 14 Aug. 2006 . Woodlief, Ann. â€Å"Bartleby the Scrivener Web Study Text.† Virginia Commonwealth University. 15 Aug. 2006 . Jeffrey Andrew Weinstock, â€Å"Doing Justice to Bartleby,† ATQ (The American Transcendental Quarterly) 17.1 (2003), Questia, 14 Aug. 2006 . Steven Doloff, â€Å"The Prudent Samaritan: Melville’s â€Å"Bartleby, the Scrivener† as Parody of Christ’s Parable to the Lawyer,† Studies in Short Fiction 34.3 (1997): 357, Questia, 14 Aug. 2006 . Todd F. Davis, â€Å"The Narrator’s Dilemma in â€Å"Bartleby the Scrivener†: The Excellently Illustrated Re-statement of a Problem,† Studies in Short Fiction 34.2 (1997): 183, Questia, 14 Aug. 2006 .

Resisitivity Through Copper Wire

Measuring the Resistivity of Copper Wire of Different Lengths In this report I will be writing about the experiment I will conduct on copper wire of different lengths. The dependent variable I will be measuring is the resistance of the Copper wire. To do this experiment, one needs to obtain measurements with a high degree of accuracy, taking care of the equipment they use and measuring each value to a certain degree of accuracy for all results. The problem with measuring the resistivity of Copper wire is due to the properties of copper as a material.Copper naturally has a low resistance due to it being a superconductor, meaning that it only has a resistance of minute amounts. As it has this property, it is important to use a copper wire specimen that is long enough and thin enough to have an appreciable resistance. The normal value for the resistivity of copper is about 10-8? m. A 1m length of copper wire with a cross sectional area of 1mm? (10-6m? ) can be predicted to have a resist ance of 0. 01?. This can be calculated by using the resistance formula of: R=? lA? 10-8 ? m x 1m10-6m2=10-2? The wire I will use is going to be thinner than this and will vary in length from 0. -1. 0 metres with a difference of 0. 2m from the previous wire specimen. In total I will have 5 different lengths. Apparatus: * Voltmeter- Accuracy stated as ( ± 0. 5% Read. + 1dgt) in the user manual * Ammeter- Accuracy stated as ( ± 1. 2% Read. + 1dgt) in the user manual * Battery Supply of 6V * Copper Wire * 1m Ruler in cm * Scissors * Electrical Wires * Crocodile clips * Micrometer Method: The following procedure described below is how I intend to gain my results: 1. I will measure out the different lengths of copper wire I intend to use using a millimetre ruler to gain the most accurate results I can. 2. Once he lengths are cut, the diameter of the copper wire I am using must be measured. To gain the most accurate result, I will use a micrometer and measure the diameter in several pl aces on the wire and take an average value from these readings to work out the average cross sectional area. 3. I will connect the first length of wire into an electrical circuit, making sure that current can flow through the entire length of the copper wire connected. The circuit will look like this diagram: V V A A 4. The voltage will be recorded across the wire and the current running through it. 5. To find the resistance of the wire I will use the formula V=IR. . The resistivity can then be worked out using the formula: ? =RAL where R is the resistance calculated, A is the cross sectional area of the copper wire calculated and L is the length of the copper wire. The measurements shall be recorded in the following table shown below: Resistivity of Wire The physical properties of a wire can either be categorised as being an intrinsic property or an extrinsic property. The difference between the two categories of properties is that intrinsic properties do not depend on the amount o f material that is present, whereas extrinsic properties do depend on the amount of material that is present.In the following investigation of the resistivity of copper wire, one could say that the value of the voltage, resistance and current are all intrinsic properties of the copper wire. The extrinsic value of the copper wire would be its resistivity. The resistivity of the copper wire will be dependent on the material itself, which is copper. The resistivity of a material can be defined as the resistance of a 1m length with 1m? cross-sectional area. As the resistivity of material depends mainly on the properties of the material itself, each material whether it is copper or pure silicon has its own resistivity coefficient.The coefficient for copper is 1. 72 ? 10-8? m. This value may seem very small for resistivity, but if one were to know that copper is classed as a superconductor meaning that it conducts electricity extremely well, they would know that in order for the conductan ce to be very high, the resistivity must be very low. This can also be explained by the fact that resistivity is the inverse of conductivity (? =1? ). The potential difference across the copper wire (measured in volts) and the flow of charge (the current) through the copper wire are related through the resistance of the copper wire, not its resistivity.In order to find the resistivity, one needs to work out the resistance first by using the equation R=VI , and then from this they can use the formula ? =RAL to find the resistance. The â€Å"A† represents the cross-sectional area of the wire that will be used in the experiment. The resistance of the wire is expected to double in value when the length of the wire doubles in size. The resistivity however, should stay near enough the same throughout all of the repeats conducted. Reducing the uncertainty in the resultsThere are some factors which could affect the accuracy of my results in the experiment of the resistivity of copper wire. One of the factors which could affect the accuracy of my results is to do with the measuring devices I use to conduct the experiment. Any measuring device can only be used to measure to a certain degree of accuracy. It is this certain degree which determines how accurate your results are to the true value. In my experiment, I am using a 3? Digits Multifunction Multimeter (DMM) to measure the current through the circuit and the potential difference (p. d. ) across the copper wire.The main advantage of using a DMM compared to using an analogue voltmeter is the fact that they allow you to record a value to a certain number of decimal places by having different ranges which correspond to the level of precision of the reading. In the experiment I am conducting, I will be measuring the p. d. to a resolution of 0. 001V using the 2V range on the multimeter. Having the resolution to this degree of measurement ensures that I get a voltage reading to 3 decimal places increasing the accu racy of the reading and allowing me to obtain a closer value to the true value.The accuracy for the ammeter has been published as being  ±1. 2% of the reading + 1 LSD for the range (200mA) and resolution (0. 1mA) I will be using for the current. This means that the value I will record will be 1. 2% of the true value of the current +0. 1mA. I am using the 200mA range rather than the 20A range because the resolution of the result is greater than that of the 20A range. This will record a more accurate result which reduces the uncertainty in my results. Similarly the range I will use on the voltmeter which is at 2V has an accuracy of  ±0. 5% of the reading + 1 LSD, which is even more accurate.Another factor which can affect the resistivity of the result is the temperature of the copper wire. This can affect the resistivity by changing the value of the resistance to make the resistance less proportional to that of the length of wire. Normally the resistance of a wire will increase as the length of the wire increases due to their being more atoms in the wire for the electrons to pass by in order to get the through the entire length of wire. As the increase in resistance ? increase in length, the resistance should double when the length of the copper wire is doubled.In order to try and make sure the resistance is not affected by temperature, I will connect the copper wire up into the circuit at a low voltage so that the copper wire will not warm up and increase in resistance due to the atoms inside vibrating more. I will also be using a micrometer to measure the diameter of the wire. I am using a micrometer instead of a standard cm ruler because the level of uncertainty is far less than that of a ruler. The micrometer allows me to record a value for the diameter of the wire with an uncertainty of  ±0. 0005mm, whereas with an ordinary ruler with mm markings, the uncertainty would be  ±0. 1mm. Results:These are the results I collected from the experiment carrie d out. All of the data is raw data that I have collected myself and has not been manipulated in way at all. N. B- The diameter of the wire was measured to be 0. 435mm. The cross sectional area was calculated as being 1. 48? 10-7m2. This value was used throughout the experiment to work out the different resistivity values using the resistivity equation as stated previously. Repeat| Length of Wire (m)| Voltage (V)| Current (A)| Resistance (? )| Resistivity (? m)| 1| 0. 2| 0. 044| 1. 911| 0. 023| 1. 71E-08| 2| 0. 2| 0. 042| 1. 907| 0. 022| 1. 64E-08| 3| 0. 2| 0. 043| 1. 909| 0. 23| 1. 67E-08| 1| 0. 4| 0. 088| 1. 882| 0. 047| 1. 74E-08| 2| 0. 4| 0. 085| 1. 879| 0. 045| 1. 68E-08| 3| 0. 4| 0. 087| 1. 869| 0. 047| 1. 73E-08| 1| 0. 6| 0. 132| 1. 839| 0. 072| 1. 78E-08| 2| 0. 6| 0. 135| 1. 845| 0. 073| 1. 81E-08| 3| 0. 6| 0. 129| 1. 839| 0. 070| 1. 74E-08| 1| 0. 8| 0. 158| 1. 748| 0. 090| 1. 68E-08| 2| 0. 8| 0. 163| 1. 741| 0. 094| 1. 74E-08| 3| 0. 8| 0. 159| 1. 745| 0. 091| 1. 69E-08| 1| 1 . 0| 0. 207| 1. 739| 0. 119| 1. 77E-08| 2| 1. 0| 0. 209| 1. 738| 0. 120| 1. 79E-08| 3| 1. 0| 0. 201| 1. 710| 0. 118| 1. 75E-08| From the table above, I also worked out the averages of the results measured from the experiment.Repeat| Length of Wire (m)| Voltage (V)| Average V| Current (I)| Average I| Resistance (? )| Average R| Resistivity (? m)| 1| 0. 2| 0. 044| 0. 043| 1. 911| 1. 909| 0. 023| 0. 023| 1. 71E-08| 2| 0. 2| 0. 042| | 1. 907| | 0. 022| | 1. 64E-08| 3| 0. 2| 0. 043| | 1. 909| | 0. 023| | 1. 67E-08| 1| 0. 4| 0. 088| 0. 087| 1. 882| 1. 877| 0. 047| 0. 046| 1. 74E-08| 2| 0. 4| 0. 085| | 1. 879| | 0. 045| | 1. 68E-08| 3| 0. 4| 0. 087| | 1. 869| | 0. 047| | 1. 73E-08| 1| 0. 6| 0. 132| 0. 132| 1. 839| 1. 841| 0. 072| 0. 072| 1. 78E-08| 2| 0. 6| 0. 135| | 1. 845| | 0. 073| | 1. 81E-08| 3| 0. 6| 0. 129| | 1. 839| | 0. 70| | 1. 74E-08| 1| 0. 8| 0. 158| 0. 160| 1. 748| 1. 745| 0. 090| 0. 092| 1. 68E-08| 2| 0. 8| 0. 163| | 1. 741| | 0. 094| | 1. 74E-08| 3| 0. 8| 0. 159| | 1. 745| | 0. 091| | 1. 69E-08| 1| 1. 0| 0. 207| 0. 206| 1. 739| 1. 729| 0. 119| 0. 119| 1. 77E-08| 2| 1. 0| 0. 209| | 1. 738| | 0. 120| | 1. 79E-08| 3| 1. 0| 0. 201| | 1. 710| | 0. 118| | 1. 75E-08| Uncertainties within my results: Before creating the graph of my results, I calculated the overall uncertainties of each measurement within this experiment, so that I could see where the most uncertainty of the average resistivity value comes from.To calculate the uncertainty for each measurement, I took the average measurement that had the biggest difference from its original data. The Percentage of uncertainties of each measurement was as follows: * Percentage uncertainty of the Voltage V= 0. 206 ±0. 005 V Uncertainty in V= 0. 0050. 206? 100%?  ±2. 43% * Percentage uncertainty of the Current I=1. 729 ±0. 019 A Uncertainty in I=0. 0191. 729? 100%?  ±1. 10% * Percentage of Uncertainty in Resistance R=V/I Uncertainty of R=1. 10%+2. 43%?  ±3. 53% * Percentage of Uncertainty in Length Unce rtainty=0. 6 ±0. 001m Uncertainty in L=0. 0010. 6? 100%?  ±0. 17% Percentage of Uncertainty in Area: The Diameter of the wire is 0. 435 ±0. 0005mm The best area where the diameter is 0. 435mm A=? 0. 21752? 0. 1486mm2? 1. 486? 10-7m2 The Maximum area where the diameter is ? 0. 4355mm A=? 0. 217752? 0. 1489mm2? 1. 489? 10-7m2 The Minimum area where the diameter is ? 0. 4345mm A=? 0. 217252? 0. 1482mm2? 1. 482? 10-7m2 So the area is 0. 148 ±0. 0004mm2 with a percentage uncertainty of: A=0. 00040. 148? 100%?  ±0. 27% * So the percentage uncertainty in the Resistivity can be calculated as the sum of all the uncertainties in the experiment: ? =RAL=3. 53%+0. 27%+0. 17%= ±3. 97%The percentages of instrument error are as follows: * Voltmeter reading is  ±0. 0005V Instrumental error in Voltmeter= 0. 00050. 206? 100? 0. 24% * Ammeter reading is  ±0. 0005A Instrumental error in Ammeter=0. 00051. 729? 100? 0. 03% * Micrometer reading is  ±0. 0005mm Instrumental error in Mircome ter=0. 00050. 435? 100? 0. 11% * The total instrumental error is the total of each instrumental error stated above which would be 0. 38%. Graph 1: Graph 2: Data Analysis: In all of my results that I have collected, there is a strong relationship between the increasing length of wire and the value for the resistance.One would expect this strong correlation between the resistance and the length since one of the simple laws of electrical resistance is that it increases proportionally with the increase in the length of the wire. One can explain this through the understanding of electrons in a circuit and the atoms arranged within the components in a circuit. With my experiment of copper wire, a current passed through my circuit once a voltage was applied to the circuit. When the electrons were given energy to move they passed through the circuit to the copper wire where they experienced the resistance which was calculated.As the lengths of the copper wire increase, the amount of fixed a toms within the structure of the wire increases. Due to this the electrons have a higher chance of colliding with the fixed atoms, which causes the wire to heat up and increase the resistance. One can see the certainty in the correlation between the average resistance and the length of the copper wire by looking at the gradient of the line of best fit within graph 1. The gradient shows that R? =0. 9984, showing an extremely strong positive correlation between the two variables.From the equation of the gradient displayed in graph 1, the average resistivity can be calculated which takes into account all of the points within the data collected. The gradient of the line shows the equation Resistance (R)Length (L). In the calculation for resistivity, one not only needs the value of RL, but also needs the cross sectional area of the wire. If the cross sectional area of the wire is multiplied by the gradient, then the average resistivity can be calculated: ? =RAL=0. 1192? 1. 486? 10-7m2? 1 . 77? 10-8? m In Graph 2, the percentage of uncertainty of each average resistance was displayed in the vertical error bars.The percentage of uncertainty of the length of the wire was so small that it was not worth adding to the graph since it is extremely hard to see on the graph. From these percentage uncertainties of the average resistance in the experiment, one can calculate the maximum and the minimum values for the resistivity from looking at the gradients like we did for graph 1. To calculate the minimum gradient, I took the gradient of the line from the maximum uncertainty in the lowest resistance to the minimum uncertainty of the highest resistance.I did this to obtain the shallowest gradient possible from all the points on the graph. I then multiplied this gradient by the smallest area value. lowest ? =0. 1144? 1. 482? 10-7m2? 1. 70? 10-8? m For the maximum value of resistivity, I took the value of the gradient of the line from the minimum uncertainty in the lowest resista nce to the maximum uncertainty of the highest resistance. I did this to obtain the steepest gradient possible from all of the points on the graph. I then multiplied this by the maximum area. maximum ? =0. 1263? (1. 489? 10-7m2)? 1. 88? 10-8? mAfter looking at the average, minimum and maximum values of the resistivity taking into account all of the uncertainties within the calculation one could say that from the investigation conducted, the resistivity of copper wire is 1. 76? 10-8 ±1. 2? 10-9. The percentage uncertainty of the resistivity would then be: 1. 2? 10-91. 76? 10-8? 100%? 6. 8% Biggest Source of Uncertainty From looking at all of the percentage uncertainties for all my measurements, the resistance produced the most uncertainty. The uncertainty of resistance was worked out by adding up the uncertainty of the voltage and the current measured.It must have been from these two calculations where the uncertainty of the resistance became noticed. From calculating the instrument al errors of the multimeter used as a voltmeter and an ammeter, I would not conclude that the vast majority of the error came from the accuracy of the apparatus. I would say that the average resistance I calculated was from the average current which had the biggest difference from its original data, and the average voltage which had the biggest difference from its original data. The average data I had chosen was 0. 206 ±0. 05V and the average data I had chosen for current was 1. 729 ±0. 019A, as they had the biggest uncertainties. Due to this fact I would have produced an uncertainty which had the biggest difference from the original value, so the maximum possible uncertainty for the resistance. Anomalies and Systematic Errors I did not have any anomalous results when looking at the average resistance graph. All of the points plotted show strong correlation with the increase in length. Systematic errors may have contributed to some of my resistivity values being higher or lower than my overall average.An example of this could have been when measuring the diameter of the copper wire. The micrometer did not let me know if both of the sides of the copper wire were touching the micrometer measuring device sufficiently enough or whether or not it was touching both sides of the copper wire more than enough, which would then mean it squashed the diameter of the wire resulting in a lower diameter at certain points across the wire, since I took 3 readings and averaged them out. If this was the case, then one of my wires may have had a higher resistance than the others.One other systematic error may have come from the battery pack. It may have had a temporary glitch in which less electrical energy was sent through the circuit meaning less current was flowing through the circuit, resulting in a larger resistance than that of the previous recording with the same length of wire. This would also alter the final value of the resistivity. Another uncertainty which would b e counted as human error could have been the position at which I had placed the crocodile clips at either end of the copper wire.For the same length of wire, the crocodile clip may have been placed further away from the end of the copper wire than the previous measurement, meaning that the length of the wire would have decreased marginally which may have resulted in a lower resistance recording. Also, when I measured the length of the copper wire, I had to straighten out the length of the wire since it was coiled. When doing this I may have accidently pulled the length of the wire increasing its length by a fractional amount.Having said this, it may have altered the resistance measured in the wire making it larger than it should have been since the electrons have to travel a longer distance. Evaluation After looking at all of my results, I believe that the method I used and the ways of reducing the uncertainty in my experiment were effective. The instrumental errors were minimal and the overall uncertainty of my final calculation of resistivity was a low value. The resistivity value itself did alter but mainly stayed constant throughout the experiment.As I have said, I do not believe this was because of the accuracy of the multimeters I used but due to other factors such as changes in the environment like temperature, or due to systematic errors to do with the battery pack I used. To decrease the uncertainty in my resistance measured, I could use an even lower resolution on my voltmeter (0. 1mV) and ammeter (0. 001mA) to reduce the negative effect of Least Significant Digits (LSD) and to give the most accurate result.This way I could then increase the precision of my results and record a value which is closer to the true value When comparing my average value of resistivity with the published value of resistivity which is 1. 72? 10-8? m, my average value is very close to the published value which shows the level of accuracy throughout my experiment considering the more precise tools that were used by the professionals to gain the published value. The repeats I did helped me to record a value for the resistivity that was close to the published value by reducing the random uncertainty in my results.To gain even more accuracy I could do more repeats, or I could alter the intervals between each length to 0. 1m to increase my range of data. That way I will reduce even more random error within my data. I could also change the different diameters of the wire or change the material I use to compare these results with those and see how they differ. One other change I could do next time is to use an Alternating Current (AC) rather than a Direct Current (DC), since AC is more conventional in houses so it would have provided further information as to how good copper is in the use of houses.

Parents Are the Best Teachers

Parents experience life with their children from the beginning of their lives. Hence, they have taught their children many lessons. They are definitely the first teachers of their children but they are not the best teachers. Firstly, parents are closest to their children so it’s difficult to teach their children strictly. For example, it’s time to do homework but their children don’t want to do so. They may wheedle their parents into letting them do it later. Parents always pamper their children so they permit them to do homework later. This increasingly spoils their children. Secondly, parents constantly shape their children interests to be similar to theirs. This makes their children difficult to develop their potential ability. For example, if the parents like music they may want their children to attend music class. Likewise, if the parents like art they may let their children attend art class. However, what if their children are interested in science? Last but not least, because of the differences of generation, parents’ points of view are somewhat narrower than their children’s. For example, their children want to go to some university which is far form their hometown in order to have more experience in live. In contrary, parents prefer their children to attend to university which is near their hometown because they think it is unsafe for them to live far form family. In conclusion, parents might be the good teachers but they are not the best ones. They can’t teach the children strictly, always tend to shape their interests and have the different points of view with their children. Fortunately, we have various teachers during our lives. Therefore, we can learn a lot from them They are also your guid they let you do what you want they also help ypu alot with yur studies and stuff they also make you food. and buy you clothes and whatever you want

Beyond the Ordinary Bloody Hell Drama Essay

Beyond all human endeavors to attain their highest human potential; be it during grief, war, abundance, injustice, among others, is the rule that no matter what, â€Å" always do the right thing. † In this particular paper, I have chosen William Shakespeare’s work â€Å"Hamlet, Prince of Denmark† as well as Oscar Wilde’s â€Å"The Importance of Being Earnest† as the two main plays for my essay. I have a particular interest in these two plays by two different authors, because the two radiates social and moral themes, which I think is more interesting. â€Å"Hamlet† for example, conveys the message of revenge as evil and could result to unintended consequences. â€Å"The Importance of Being Earnest† posits an emphasis on the importance of being Earnest (since this was paramount during the Victorian era), which I would later on mention in my succeeding discussions. However, I have chosen the two plays because of its contrasting theme-satire vs. tragedy. I was particularly interested in the way the two plays (in different themes) could stir up moral-social values and messages. ‘Hamlet† is a story of oozing portrayal for vengeance (Shakespeare as cited in The Literature Network, 2000). Hamlet accidentally killed Polonius, after he thought that it was Claudius (the new King of Denmark). Look more:  satire in the importance of being earnest essay He intended to avenge the death of his father on Claudius. However, after the accidental killing of Polonius, Ophelia (the daughter of the latter who loved Hamlet despite the hatred she felt for him) and Laertes (son of Polonius, brother of Ophelia), were especially furious on him and planned to kill him to avenge the death of their father. It was the latter who carried on the plan since Ophelia was prevented by her love for Hamlet. On the course of their pursuit for revenge, all Hamlet and Laertes gain was the unintended consequence of their actions. The first accidentally killed Polonius instead of the king, as cited by Shakespeare (n. d): Hamlet: â€Å"How now? A rat? [draws] â€Å"Dead for a ducat, dead†! Polonius: [Behind the Arras] â€Å"O, I am slain†! [Fall and Dies]. (Shakespeare p. 150) Laertes, on the other hand, instead of killing Hamlet, was killed by his own sword as mentioned by Shakespeare (n. d): Laertes Why, as a woodcock to mine own springe, Osric; I am justly kill’d with mine own treachery. (Shakespeare p. 246) The message however of the play conveys that, revenge is not always the right thing to do, no matter how badly you’ve been hurt by someone. This is conveyed in the play of Shakespeare (n. d), when Laertes spoke to Hamlet: It is here, Hamlet: Hamlet, thou art slain; No medicine in the world can do thee good; (Shakespeare p. 247) On the other hand â€Å"The Importance of Being Earnest† portrayed the story of two characters (Jack and Algernon) that had employ deception for their convenience; Jack using the name Ernest and Algernon having an imaginary friend named Bunburry. The two employed deception to attain their ends (for Jack to be engaged to Gwendolyn and Algernon used Bunburry as an excuse to leave the country). Later on, Algernon also made-up a story that he was Ernest, to propose to Cecily. It was found out later on in the story that smoke has its way of escaping; the deception did not last long, it was soon discovered by the girls including Lady Bracknell (Gwendolen’s mother) that Ernest was just an imaginary person whose name was used by two persons (The Importance of Being Earnest, 2000). To cover all these mistakes, the two men were told to do the right thing to redeem themselves from the wrath of their fiancees. The two plays had some common grounds. Firstly, both plays were guilty of committing the â€Å"law of unintended consequence† of their actions. Hamlet is a story about revenge, but people who seek revenge for the death of their loved ones (Hamlet and Laertes), were not prepared for the unintended consequence of their actions. As the tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark it says: â€Å"A villain killed my father†¦I his sole son, would do the same villain†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Shakespeare as cited in etext. library, n. d). However, it was not anticipated by Hamlet that the man he killed was not the King. Clearly, Hamlet had mistaken Polonius as King Claudius. Moreover, when Laertes avenges the death of his father, he was killed by his own sword. The result of their plans was different since they were not familiar with the possible consequences of their actions, because experience wise, they’re not raised to slay somebody out of hatred and vengeance. As was mentioned previously, Jack and Algernon also did not expect the law of unintended consequences of their deception. It had evoked a lot of fantasies from the women, and led to conflict when both women assumed that they were both engaged to the same man named Ernest. One of the lines in The Importance of Being Ernest (2000) showed this conflict: Gwendolen. [Quite politely, rising. ] My darling Cecily, I think there must be some slight error. Mr. Ernest Worthing is engaged to me. The announcement will appear in the Morning Post on Saturday at the latest. Cecily. [Very politely, rising. ] I am afraid you must be under some misconception. Ernest proposed to me exactly ten minutes ago. [Shows diary. ] (p. 43) A â€Å"civilized war† in which flaring emotions were dealt not through aggression, but tensions over words and manners exist between Cecily and Gwendolen when they unmistakably thought that they were engaged to the same man named Earnest. The next comparative point for the play is the emphasis on doing the â€Å"right thing. † If King Claudius respected the life of the former King, Hamlet would not have thought of revenge, same as Polonius. However, they neglect to pay respect to the lives of these people, hence, one mistake leads to another. Vengeance could not be the right thing to do; since social laws are present (this is the function of law in every society-to ensure harmony and control towards equilibrium). The other play (†¦Being Earnest) was in fact clear about choosing the â€Å"right thing† to do. First, being morally right is the â€Å"right thing† to do. Take for example the line of Algernon after his conversation with Lane. The first stated that, what use the lower class would be if they don’t set good example; when they are in fact a class to have no sense of moral responsibility. Gwendolen believes that style, not sincerity is more important (The Importance of Being Earnest, 2000). This was depicted in the story when the Gwendolen and Cecily, instead of pouring out their hatred and contempt to each other, chose to have a â€Å"civilized war† because it is the â€Å"right† thing to do-impression management is more important than sincerity. Respect was also of significance in Hamlet. The play conveyed that whatever wrong a person has caused on you, it is still wrong for you to wish for his death, much more kill him. Killing someone had never been right, much more, seeking vengeance and putting the role of law on your own hands as what Hamlet and Laertes did. The third point of comparison for the two plays is their similarity in portraying conflict. Conflict usually occurs over the competition of highly valuable scarce resources. While Hamlet was a tragic play, it evoked conflicting interest between King Claudius and Hamlet’s father. Shakespeare (n. d) illustrated this scene through the following lines: Ghost: A serpent stung me; so the whole ear of Denmark Is by a forged process of my death Rankly abused: but know, thou noble youth, The serpent that did sting thy father’s life Now wears his crown (Shakespeare p. 14) The two were in conflict over the reign of the thrown in Denmark. It should be noted that conflict would either result to a positive or a negative consequence. Take for instance the case of King Claudius and Hamlet’s father; their conflicting interests enable King Claudius to kill his brother to take over to his thrown as the King of Denmark. On the other hand, The Importance of Being Earnest posits a deeper conflict between classes. In the way upper classes looked at marriage, wealth and the importance of superficial personalities to retain their pleasant status. Despite any wrong done, upper classes have their ways of doing the â€Å"right† thing, which they themselves have imposed. Lady Bracknell touches on the issue when she states, that: â€Å"pleasant or not, an engagement should be given to a girl through a surprise† (The Importance of Being Earnest, 2000: p. 43). Upper class has a standard way of looking at marriage-in fact they looked at it as a business transaction. Hence, marriage for the upper class is a way of showing social position, character and â€Å"taste† for marriage. This was however seen in the words of Gwendolen when she said sugar is being out of fashion and cake is not in best houses where it used to be seen (The Importance of Being Earnest, 2000). Cecily put sugar and cake on Gwendolen’s plate as otherwise requested by the latter. The two girls were actually insulting each other, but chose to do it in a more subtle and superficial way; that nobody could hint they were relatively furious with each other. Always doing the right thing is the best way to deal with hatred, happiness, and conflict, and extreme emotions. I have proved this right when Hamlet chose to revenge the death of his father instead of trusting the law of society to punish King Claudius. His revenge leads one way to another when other person was being killed, living the latter’s family in grief and the son to be also planning for revenge. On the other hand, I had also proved that doing the right thing is the best way to settle misunderstandings and feud. In Being Earnest, deception was used at first, and it was soon found out that it could create great complication; not only, people doing the deception gets into trouble but also the people in whom they had applied their deception as in the case of Gwendolen, Cecily and Lady Bracknell. Also, doing the right thing could be the best way to avoid negative consequences of conflict (e. g following the rule of transition to the throne in the case of Hamlet). Above all things, the two plays were great, since, errors were recognized and even if the right thing to do was not done immediately, the characters came into their senses and recognized that what they have done might be corrected. With the right attitude towards things as well as with the values that guide human character, one might not go wrong if s/he just lived with these and chose to always do what is â€Å"right† for everybody. â€Å"Hamlet† is indeed a great play, depicting many facets of the test of character amid hatred and betrayal. In the Importance of being Earnest, it was personal volition to use deception, but in the end, the choice to be â€Å"right† for the sake of harmony prevailed. References Hamlet. (2004). TeachWithMovies. com, Retrieved, January 20, 2008, from http://www. teachwithmovies. org/samples/hamlet. html The Importance of Being Earnest. (2000). CliffsNotes. com. Retrieved, January 20, 2008, from http://www. cliffsnotes. com/WileyCDA/LitNote/The-Importance-of-Being-Earnest. id-29,pageNum-31. html (IMPORTANT)

Greek Mythology: Artemis Essay

Greek mythology is a religion filled with myths and legends used to tell stories that explain how some things came to be or to teach lessons. In Greek mythology, Artemis is a very popular goddess with many traits and attitudes therefore there are many myths regarding her in particular. Artemis is the goddess of the hunt, wilderness, wild animals, female fertility, childbirth, and the moon (â€Å"Artemis (Diana)†). Daughter of Zeus and Leto, Artemis is very strong very capable of defending herself against others. She is against men, marriage, and the limitations it sets for the rights of women (Regula). She is also mentioned and involved in many myths throughout Greek mythology. Artemis is the daughter of Zeus and Leto. In some stories, Artemis was thought to have been birthed by Demeter instead of Leto but in other Egyptian legends, its states that she was the offspring of Dionysus and Isis, while Leto was the caretaker. She also has a twin brother named Apollo (Atsma). They were both born under a palm tree at the same time on the island of Delos (Regula). In other stories, Artemis was supposedly brought into this world earlier than Apollo to nurse her mother through the birth of her other sibling (Atsma). Artemis is in charge of the moon, childbirth, wild animals, and female fertility (â€Å"Artemis (Diana)†) She was never fond with men. She promised to be a sworn virgin forever while she runs the forest with her fellow maiden friends. She has even been known to kill peeping men for spying on her while bathing (Regula). Artemis, being twins in all, was almost the feminine Apollo. He handled the young women while he was in charge of the young men. The symbols of her are the silver bow and arrow