text:
User talk:Zhuo Jia Dai

HSE
i am working on a wikibook 'From Data to Insight' that is about the level of HSE, but you don't seem to have a chapter on 'statistics'...any reason why not?

--Ldecola (discuss • contribs) 17:22, 26 November 2011 (UTC)

Love your HSE book! Hope you update it soon :)

--

Hey :) I changed your modifications to Discrete mathematics back, sorry: there is already a link to intro logic. I'm trying to keep the intro section to have info that will give one the basics of the topics, and the upper level section to be the ideas and concepts that build on the intro topics.

Hope you don't mind :) Dysprosia 02:50, 13 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Question for you on Talk:HSE Primes Dysprosia 22:08, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Some helpful hints
 * x\quad y = $$x \quad y$$
 * x\qquad y = $$x\qquad y$$
 * x^{x^x} \pmod{12} = $$ x^{x^x} \pmod{12}$$
 * ) Dysprosia 07:53, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)

hi xiaodai,

i've been on wikipedia for a while, but only had a look at wikibooks since i need to code Basic Polish language course into my carbon-based processor/soft-disk ;)

Looks good, and nice to see the HSE stuff you're doing. Say hi to terry gagen for me. :)

Boud 14:02, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

HSE!
Love your HSE book, thanks so much! I usually feel as if I have exactly enough hints to think about something for a few minutes, and then think Eureka! ;)

For the programming section, I think I could help (see my Livejournal) if you want Lisp/Scheme (go Scheme!). Haskell is the only other mathematically-oriented language I can think of - are you planning on using that?

Oh - and aren't Venn diagrams best suited in the logic category? R3m0t 17:35, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I'm glad you liked HSE so much! I'm trying my best to do a good job, but as so often is the case in my first drafts, glaring spelling and grammar mistakes seem to plague my work. Lucky you pick them out for me.

I do not know enough about Lisp, Prolog, Scheme (never heard of it) or Haskell to decide whether they are suitable for high school students or not. If you think a coherent course can be taught using one of those languages, then please go ahead! Create a new chapte if you have to. But I was thinking of teaching a more conventional language like Pascal. Anyway we are not just writing about programming, but mathematical programming. Haskell seems to be a good choice, but where can I find a good programming IDE/compiler for it? I simply haven't done the research.

And nice to meet you. How do you do?Zhuo Jia Dai

 * Just being a stickybeak, but
 * If you want Haskell, the Glasgow Haskell Compiler is an excellent Windows/*nix based Haskell interpreter and compiler environment. Some systems may only run the Hugs system. I'm about to go to bed so I can't give you an exact link but I'm sure you can google it :)
 * Haskell is a good choice of language for pure, functional programming. It's not quite the best language for exploring mathematical concepts in since it's a strict functional programming language. You may want to concentrate on looking at programming in common Computer Algebra systems such as Maple and Mathematica (I do know both systems, but Mathematica's better) for stuff like numerical approximations and all that funky jazz. Haskell is nice for exploring recursion, but more conventional looping structures are easier taught in some other language. With teaching Mathematica (You guys should still have it at Sydney, right?) you get the best of both worlds, really.
 * HTH :) Dysprosia 11:59, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * Think free. Learn free. is the Wikibooks concept, but Mathematica seems to be a commercial thing. I wouldn't encourage people to use a propriety language on Wikibooks. Wikipedia: Lisp programming language Scheme programming language Haskell programming language Maple computer algebra system Mathematica Maxima Computer algebra system r3m0t 19:58, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * It doesn't mean we can't teach non-free software, at all. And it's not exactly proprietary software either - it's well used. I merely mention this to Xiaodai as an option. In any case, are we to forbid the creation of a Windows guidebook here because it is non-free software? We cannot be bigoted on the forbidding of teaching just because of its origins now, can we? Dysprosia 21:43, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * A Windows guidebook would be created for users of Windows who wish to (manipulate/configure/whatever) their installation. By teaching Mathematica in a textbook not created specifically for teaching Mathematica, that is encouraging people to use Mathematica. Lisp, Scheme, Ruby, Haskell seem different to me - it is hard to make any money out of them (plenty of compilers or interpreters are free already) so it's offering a choice of compiler, etc. r3m0t 21:55, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * I'm going to reply to this at Talk:HSE Mathematical programming, to stop cluttering up Xiao's talk page Dysprosia 23:00, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi, are you from China or Taiwan? Do you speak Chinese? Could you help improve text book Chinese? Thanks! --Yacht 09:12, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * 我的中文不是很好, 好像帮不上什么忙.

 * How could he possibly be from Taiwan? His name is in Hanyu Pinyin. --Menchi 10:43, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

*waves*jumps up and down*
Could we consider showing two or more languages side-by-side for the time being? Also, please read over my beginnings of an introduction. Is it too compicated/too much detail/etc? r3m0t 15:15, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Well I read it, it reads ok, except i think the command line and how to issue command part should be clarified upon. I think it's pretty confusing for someone who is not highly computer-literate.Zhuo Jia Dai

HSE is great
Your HSE book is great, it's easy enough to read at a reasonable speed and difficult enough to be challenging. I tried to read several real books but those weren't as fun to read because I had to stop regularly to check if I understood everything correctly. So, thanks for the book.mmartin

 * Thanks, but you may only have read the first chapter, the rest are still horrible. I think they need huge improvements. Xiaodai 22:40, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I actually started with the third chapter because I already knew everything in the first one and the second one seemed less interesting. But I agree with you that it can still be improved, although it completly readable for me.(17 year old highschool student)mmartin 24 Jul 2004

 * Thank you very much for your feedback, much appreciated. Xiaodai 03:13, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Attention! Attention!
I would like to inform you that I've come up with a alternative solution(actually the final answer is less complex) to question 4 in logic-problem set. Click here to go to the talk page to see the solution

And also, Nov 21st is coming soon, and does that means editing work are going to be restarted to full strength soon?

 * Yeah, uni holidays starts now and i will do more editing than during the semester. What does "more" mean? I'm uncertainty. See how it goes. Xiaodai 09:10, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Concerning logic puzzle item deletion
Concerning the 5th question in logic-problem set page... Yes, I do agree this question is out of ability for most people, but I think may be at least you put it in the logic puzzle page? This way it has a place to rest. (And consider I spent some good time thinking hard and finally managed to come up with a solution--when I wrote and submitted it, the system kicked me out so the history page didn't log down it was me who submitted the solution)

 * Hmmm, i mean this problem is a bit out of reach. Thanks for contribution and i am sorry that i have to take it down. But the question is just so out of left field and you dont necessarily have to use the techniques taught in the chapter to do it properly. So i need to delete it. Congratulations on being able to solve the problem though, it's a tough one, you must be a genius. ^__^ I will put it in puzzle's page then Xiaodai 12:42, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Nominated!
I'm excited to see that the book "High School Extensions" get nominated for march book of the month. Let's hope we'll win!

Also, I would like to inform you that I've written a starter-a stub, for the discrete probability part. I want to learn some more about it. And I've came up with how to write the starting, so leave that to me as I'm having holiday now and have more free time to do it. Thanks. --Lemontea 13:10, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for that, i didn't know. I am to be nominated, but i feel this book still needs alot of work. Also, i am very much looking forward to your work. Xiaodai 00:04, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Puzzles/Logic puzzles/5 Houses
I have just cleaned up the page a bit. However, the puzzle as it stands is impossible, so obviously you made a mistake/omission in copying it. Please see Talk:5 Houses and then make corrections.

Also, the point of puzzle books is to challenge the reader. By putting the solution on the puzzle page, you are depriving the reader of this challenge, in which case what was the point of giving us the puzzle in the first place? I have cut and pasted it onto a solution page. I haven't cleaned the solution up, since I for one would like to have a go at the puzzle once it is complete. -- Smjg 17:52, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'm the one who wrote the solution, and Xiaodai just copied it to the puzzle page, so at most he is responsible for copying it to a wrong place.

As for the content of the solution, I looked at it and remembered that my school's maths club did mentioned this problem on club meeting, and I remember that the detail are different. I quickily find out that the question itself has mistake, and I just searched and choose a random complete version of that question.

Anyway, the task to do now is to find out who wrote the question in the first place, and which version of the question should we use.--Lemontea 12:30, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Vote too late
Hi Xiaodai. I just want to let you know that your vote for the book of the month for Mandarin Chinese was 37 minutes after the deadline, and has not been counted therefore. I encourage you to vote again in the current voting for April 2005, as soon as possible, since early votes seem to have a steering effect. Thanks, --Andreas 13:37, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Withdrawing adminship request
I'm surprised that you withdrew your request for adminship after waiting only five days. You had two votes of support already (you only need four), and they do say that the process could take months. I've been waiting for over a month, and that's not unusual (things move pretty slowly in Wikibooks). (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 11:26, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Template namespace
I moved a page out of the Template name space and now I feel bad. If you wanted the page in that name space I apologize. If you had it there because you wanted to be able to include it here is how you include pages in the main namespace, just put the page name as it apears in curly braces with a preceedin colon as below. The book is great by the way! Msmithma 05:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
 * thanks, i learnerd something. Xiaodai 10:07, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Welcome back
Greetings! I noticed your edit summary on your most recent contribution: "i will have the time and energy to start editing again soon. hopefully improve the quality by heaps. so it's more deserving of a recognition." Currently images without proper licensing and sourcing are being deleted. I noticed that many of yours are without a license or a source. If you would consider licensing them under an appropriate license (GFDL, PD, CC, BSD) and a source (yourself, I assume) I would greatly appreciate it. I noticed that many of your images are still be used! It would be great to be able to keep them.

And don't worry: you don't have to go through every image description page and tag it manually. You may ask an administrator (try User:Whiteknight) to run a bot to tag them all simultaneously.

Again, thank you very much, and welcome back! --Iamunknown 03:48, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Help!
Hi Zhuo Jia Dai]].

I'm probably not doing this right, but I can't see any other way. I'm new to Wikibooks and am just trying to send you a message.

I would like to help with your High School Mathematics Extensions with an addition, or possible follow-up, to your Set Theory and Infinite Processes. I have read your Chapter and like it (and have a couple of suggestions).

Here is the introduction to a ten-page sample I've written: "Cantor’s diagonal method is elegant, powerful, and simple. It has been the source of fundamental and fruitful theorems as well as devastating, and ultimately, fruitful paradoxes.  These proofs and paradoxes are almost always presented using an indirect argument.  They can be presented directly.  The direct approach, I believe, (1) is easier to understand, (2) unifies the proofs and paradoxes by exhibiting a single strategy, (3) shows Russell’s paradox to be the (obvious?) ultimate, set theoretic application of the method, and (4) is extendable to some of the semantic paradoxes."

If you're interested, please contact me; I just registered with Wikibooks, and maybe that allows you to contact me, but I wouldn't know where to look for your response. So please email me at TomSchaffter@Mac.Com.

Tom Schaffter B.S., Colorado State U, Math, '66; M.S., CSU, Math, '68; Ph.D., Berkeley, Logic and the Methodology of Science, '75. Tomschaffter (talk) 16:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Zhuo Jia Dai


text:
Latin/Lesson 11-Translation

Lesson 20, as a bit of a reward is a little translation exercise from the Gospel of Saint Luke.

Exercise 1

Vocabulary

coming soon, at the moment consult your dictionary

Respondens Simon dixit: "Aestimo quia is, cui plus donavit". At ille dixit ei: "Recte iudicasti". Et conversus ad mulierem, dixit Simoni: "Vides hanc mulierem? Intravi in domum tuam: aquam pedibus meis non dedisti; haec autem lacrimis rigavit pedes meos et capillis suis tersit. Osculum mihi non dedisti haec autem, ex quo intravi non cessavit osculari pedes meos. Oleo caput meum non unxisti; haec autem unguento unxit pedes meos. Propter quod dico tibi: Remissa sunt peccata eius multa, quoniam dilexit multrum: cui autem minus dimittitur, minus diligit." Dixit autem ad illam: "Remissa sunt peccata tua". Et coeperunt, qui simul accumbebant, dicere intra se: "quis est hic, qui etiam peccata dimittit?". Dixit autem ad mulierem: Fides tua te salvam fecit; vade in pace!".

Et factum est deinceps, et ipse iter faciebat per civitatem et castellum praedicans et evangelizans regnum Dei, et Duodecim cum illo, et mulieres aliquae, quae erant curatae ab spiritibus malignis et infirmitatibus, Maria, quae vocatur Magdalene, de qua daemonia septem exierant, et Ioanna uxor Chuza procuratoris Herodis, et Sussanna et aliae multae, quae ministrabant eis de facultatibus suis.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Latin/Lesson 11-Translation


text:
Latin/Lesson 6-Translation

Congratulations! You have completed the Introductory Latin course! To finish off, you can look at an exciting section from Caesar's Civil Wars Book II stanza 10–12.

Exercise 1

Skill: Translation from Latin source

Vocabulary, coming soon

Ubi ex ea turri, quae circum essent opera, tueri se posse confisi sunt, musculum pedes LX longum ex turrim murumque perducerent, facere instituerunt cuius musculi haec erat forma. Duae primum trabes in solo aeque longae distantes inter se pedes IIII collocantur, inque eis columellae pedum in altitudinem V defiguntur. Has inter se capreolis molli fastigio coniungunt, ubi tigna, quae musculi tegendi causa ponant, collocentur. Eo super tigna bipedalia iniciunt eaque laminis clabisque religant. Ad extremum musculi tectum trabesque extremas quadratas regulas IIII patentes digitos difigunt, quae lateres, qui super musculo struantur, contineant. Ita fastigato atque ordinatim structo, ut trabes erant in capreolis collocatae. lateribus lutoque musculus, ut ab igni, qui ex muro iaceretur, tutus esset, contegitus. Super lateres coria inducuuntur, ne canalibus aqua immissa lateres diluere posset. Coria autem, ne rursus igni ac laidibus corrumpantur, centonibus conteguntur. Hoc opus omne tectum vineis ad ipsam turrim perficiunt subitoque inoopinantibus hostibus machinatione navali, phalangis subiectis, ad turrim hostium admovent, ut aedificio iungatur.

Quo malo perterriti subito oppiindani saxa quam maxima possunt vectibus promovent praecipitataque muro in musculum devolvunt. Ictum firmitas materiae sustinet, et quicquid incidit fastigio musculi elabitur. Id ubi vident, mutant consilium: cupas taeda ac pice refertas incendunt easque de muro musculum devolvunt. Involutae labuntur, delapsae ab lateribus longuriis furcisque abopere removentur. Interim sub musculo milites vectibus infima saxa turris hostium, quibus fundamenta continebantur convellunt. Musculus ex turri latericia a nostris telis tormentisque defenditur; hostes ex muro ac turribus submoventur: non datur libera muro defendendi facultas. Compluribus iam lapidibus ex ea, quae suberat, turri subductis repentina ruina pars eius turrisconcidit, pars reliqua consequens procumbebat: cum hostes urbis direptione perterriti inermes cum infulis se porta foras universi proripiunt, ad legatos atque exercitum supplices manus tendunt.

title: Latin/Lesson 6-Translation


text:
Latin/Lesson 3-Translation

For your pleasure, I present to you a selection of poems from Catullus.

Tips for translation: soon.

Exercise 1 Skill: Reading Latin poetry I Cui dono lepidum novum libellum arido modo pumice expolitum? Corneli, tibi : namque tu solebas meas esse aliquid putare nugas, iam tum cum ausus es unus Italorum omne aevum tribus explicare chartis doctis, Juppiter, et laboriosis. quare habe tibi quicquid hoc libelli, qualecumque, quod, o patrona virgo, plus uno maneat perenne seclo. Exercise 2 Skill: Reading Latin poetry V Vivamus, mea Lesbia, atque amemus rumoresque senum severiorum omnes unius aestimemus assis. soles occidere et redire possunt. nobis, cum semel occidit brevis lux nox est perpetua una dormienda. da mi basia mille, deinde centum, dein mille altera, dein secunda centum deinde usque altera mille, deinde centum; dein, cum milia multa fecerimus conturbabimus illa, ne sciamus, aut nequis malus invidere possit, cum tantum sciat esse basiorum. Exercise 3 Skill: Reading Latin poetry XVI Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo, Aureli pathice et cinaede Furi, qui me ex versiculis meis putastis, quod sunt molliculi, parum pudicum, nam castum esse decet pium poetam ipsum, versiculos nihil necessest. qui tum denique habent salem ac leporem. si sunt molliculi ac parum pudici et quod pruriat incitare possunt, non dico pueris, sed hi s pilosis, qui duros nequeunt moveere lumbos. vos, quod milia multa basiorum legistis, male me marem putatis? pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo. Exercise 4 Skill: Reading Latin poetry XCVII Non (ita me di ament) quicquam referre putavi, utrumne os an culum olgacerem Aemilio. nilo mundius hoc, niloque immundior ille, verum etiam culus mundior et melior, nam sine dentibus est: os dentis sesquipedalis, gingivas, vero ploxeni habet veteris, praeterea rictum qualem diffissus in aestu meientis mulae cunnus habere solet. hic futuit multas et se facit esse venustum, et non pistrino traditur atque asino? quem siqua attingit, non illam posse putemus aegroti culum lingere carnificis?

title: Latin/Lesson 3-Translation


text:
Talk:US History/Early Colonial Period

Aztecs and Incas in the area which is now US???

 * No, but they deserve mention. This chapter is pre-Jamestown, not much is happening in NA. Also you should have a clear idea of what's happening in other areas of the new world and europe, for perspective. There might even be a sub-chapter devoted to european history at this time, because it's so important in the formation of the US. Etothex 01:46, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Not much happening! Remember that there were Spanish settlements in New Mexico (often confused with Mexico, but it was occupied by U.S. forces and clained by the U.S. in 1848) by 1598 under the leadership of Don Juan de Oñate, a few years before Jamestown was settled. Also long before that, the Chaconian culture which lead to the Pueblo Culture was in the Southwest as well. The Aztec and other cultures of the Valley of Mexico traded with the Chaconians, and they may have lived in the Southwest (Atzlan) before their journey to the valley of Mexico, but other than that they weren't part of U.S. History. Cybergata

Henry VIII and the Church of England
I am not sure I like the section here. The Anglican church was intended as a Catholic church that the King rather than Pope controlled. It was not intended to incorporate any of the protestant doctrines around at the time. I have not edited this as I am unsure as to what extent and when the Anglican church (C of E) became protestant (or viewed itself as such) thereafter.
 * Having found out more after I entered the above message I have edited it Dainamo 23:38, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Colombus is too brief
One of the great failures of the American education system is to make Colombus, a man who slaughtered the native people of the US out of greed for gold, look like a hero. By not mentioning his habit of massacring natives, this book simply repeats the problem it should seek to solve. After all, is this not supposed to be a NPOV book? -- LGagnon 03:06, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Review Questions
I've just added six questions at the end of the chapter to reinforce the material. I hope they help all prospective readers (and test-takers).

--Ccny930 23:28, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:US History/Early Colonial Period


text:
GCSE Science/Parallel and series circuits

GCSE Science/Electricity

You will have already studied series and parallel circuits before, so should be familiar with what a series and parallel circuit is and their basic properties.But in this module we will be looking at them in a little more detail. We will apply Ohm's law to see how we can work out the resistance of a whole circuit that is made up of a large number of components. Before we begin You might want to try some revision questions. Follow the link then come back here when you are finished. GCSE Science/Parallel and series circuits revision questions.

Resistors in Series Circuits
As we know, in a series circuit the current in all parts of the circuit is the same and the current has a one way system. The current depends on the applied voltage and the number of and nature of other components in the circuit.

Consider two resistors in a series circuit with a battery. As you might expect the total resistance in this circuit is higher than the resistance of each resistor, because the battery has to "push" the charge through both resistors one after the other. So the total potential difference of the supply is "shared" between the two resistors.

Think about what is happening to the current as it flows around the circuit. There are no branches, nowhere for the electric current to escape to, so obviously the same current must flow through both resistors. Let's call this current I.

The total resistance for the whole circuit is very simple. It's just R1 plus R2.

Formula for resistance of two resistors in series
RTotal = R1 + R2

The total resistance in a series circuit is the sum of the resistances of all the components.

Using this formula we can calculate the voltage across each resistor. But it could depend on how many resistors there are.

Example: Calculating voltages in a series circuit
Question:

Suppose R1 = 1Ω and R2= 4Ω. If the battery supplies 2.5 Volts what is the voltage across each resistor.

Answer:

First use the total resistance of the circuit to work out how much current is flowing through the circuit.

Step 1: Work out the total resistance

 * identify formula:        RTotal = R1 + R2
 * insert numbers and units  RTotal = 1Ω + 4Ω = 5Ω

Step 2: Use Ohms's law to calculate the current in the circuit. Decide which resistance to use.

 * identify formula(using the triangle):        I = V / R (Ohms's law)
 * decide which resistance to use:               Use RTotal; so formula becomes I = V / RTotal
 * insert numbers and units                      I amps = 2.5V / 5Ω = 0.5A

Now we know how much current is flowing through both resistors, we can work out the voltage across each resistor.

Step 3: Use Ohm's law to calculate the voltage across each resistor:

 * identify formula(using the triangle):        V = I x R
 * insert numbers for resistor 1:                V1 volts = 0.5A x 1Ω = 0.5 Volts
 * insert numbers for resistor 2:                V2 volts = 0.5A x 4Ω = 2.0 Volts

Practice questions

 * Q1)Let R1 = 2Ω, R2= 3Ω, and V=5V what is the voltage across R1 and R2 ?
 * Q2)Let R1 = 3Ω, R2= 3Ω, and V=6V what is the voltage across R1 and R2 ?
 * Q3)Let R1 = 2Ω, V=5V  and I= 1A what is the value of resistor R2 ?

Resistors in Parallel Circuits

Parallel circuits are a bit more complicated than series circuits, because they contain a branch - the electric current will take more than one route. Look at the diagram. At point X the current splits into 2 paths, and flows through both resistor R1 and resistor R2. It may not split in equal amounts. When several(two or more) components are connected in parallel branches, the voltage (potential difference) across each parallel branch is the same. And this is the same as the voltage across the battery.

The current through each component is the same as if it were the only component present. So the total current flowing through the battery is the sum of the currents flowing through each branch. Here is the formula for the currents flowing through a parallel circuit.

IMain = I1 + I2

Because the voltage is the same for all branches, the branch with the lowest resistance has the highest current flowing through it. Because there are more paths for the charge to flow along, the total resistance is less than either of the two paths on their own. And therefore (with the same battery) the current is bigger.

To find out the resistance of the whole circuit, we can't just add together the resistors as we did in the series circuit, we have to apply Ohm's law to each branch of the circuit.

Imagine we replaced the resistors with bulbs. You should now be able to answer the following questions from your previous knowledge.

 * Q4)You disconnect one of the bulbs, does the other stay lit?
 * Q5)You reconnect the disconnected bulb, does the other dim or brighten?
 * Q6)Would it be reasonable to say "each branch of the circuit behaves as if the other branch weren't there" ?

If you answered the above questions correctly you should find this next section easy!

Example: Calculating the resistance of several resistors in parallel
It's best to break the process down into a number of simple steps. Some books may give you a formula to use, but you shouldn't use any formula without understanding where it comes from (otherwise you are likely to remember it incorrectly or apply it inappropriately). By using a simple step by step method instead you can get a feel for why it works, and you will be far less likely to make a mistake in the exam.

Step1 considering each branch on its own, as if the other branch didn't exist use Ohm's law to work out the current flowing through each branch.

Step 2 Add the currents together to find out the total amount of current flowing through the whole circuit.

Step 3 Apply Ohm's law again to work out the total resistance of the circuit.

Example
Suppose V=2V R1 = 1Ω and R2= 1Ω.

Applying Ohm's law to the branch containing R1 gives

I1=V/R1 =2/1 =2A

Applying Ohm's law to the branch containing R2 gives I2=V/R2 =2/1 =2A

Total current = I1+I2 = 4A

Applying Ohm's law again, to the whole circuit.

RTotal =V/Itotal = 2/4 =0.5Ω

Notice that the resistance of the whole circuit is lower than the resistance of either branch!

Practice questions

 * Q7) Calculate the resistance of the above pair of resistors if they had been in series rather than parallel.
 * Q8) A parallel circuit has two resistors, one is 2Ω the other is 3Ω. The voltage is 6V. What is the total resistance of the circuit?
 * Q9) Three resistors are in parallel (three separate branches) their resistances are 2Ω, 2Ω and 3Ω. The voltage is 6V. What is the resistance of the circuit?

Answers | Three useful components>>


text:
Spanish/Exercises/Personal Pronouns - Solutions

Soluciones a los ejercicios. (Solutions to the exercises)

Pronombres personales. (Personal pronouns.)

Ejercicio 1. Rellena los espacios en blanco con los pronombres personales correctos en español.

Exercise 1. Fill the blank spaces with the correct Spanish personal pronous.

Ejercicio 2. Rellena los espacios en blanco con los pronombres personales correctos en español.

Exercise 2. Fill the blank spaces with the correct Spanish personal pronouns.

Enlace a los Ejercicios Link to exercises

Enlace a la lección 1 Link to Lesson 1.


text:
Spanish/Exercises/Regular Verbs - Solutions

Soluciones a los ejercicios. Solutions to the exercises

Fill in the blank
Por favor, rellena los espacios en blanco con la forma correcta del verbo: Please, fill in the blank with the correct form of the verb:

1. Nosotros aprendemos español. We learn Spanish.

2. Yo compro un libro. I buy a book.

3. Carmen y Roberto viajan a Mexico. Carmen and Roberto travel to Mexico.

4. Ana habla ingles. Ana speaks English.

5. Tú bebes una cerveza. You drink a beer.

6. Susana escribe una carta. Susana writes a letter.

7. Los niños estudian para el examen. The children study for the exam.

8. Fernando y Lucas cantan una cancion. Fernando and Lucas sing a song.

9. Tú lees un libro. You read a book.

10. Vosotros subís las escaleras. You (plural) climb the stairs.

Enlace a los Ejercicios Link to exercices

Enlace a la lección 3 Link to the lesson 3.


text:
Botany/Introduction discussion

Further Discussion
The questions posed in '''Chapter 1. Introduction''' are discussed further on this page. Remember, some questions are intended to be thought-provoking and more than one answer may be "correct". Users are encouraged to expand upon the discussions here.

1-1. Do you think the scientific method is something only a scientist would use?

The scientific method is something that is taught, so we might question just how natural or intuitive an approach it is. Think about how you discovered answers to interesting or difficult questions as a child. You might have first sought the opinion of an expert (like your dad, right?). That is the first step used by a scientist as well. Scientists learn to seek the expertise of others that have asked similar questions and come up with at least partial answers. This does not require contacting other scientists; more often it is a matter of becoming very familiar with the literature (the written and published record) on the subject of interest. Scientists rarely formulate hypotheses without first learning all they can about a subject from what has been published already. In effect, they learn how to put their question at the very forefront of knowledge about a subject. There are so many questions to be answered in science that no one would want to expend a lot of energy asking and answering questions to mysteries already solved. Of course learning is different. Asking questions and seeking answers from books, journals, and other sources is a valid approach to this first step of learning, and one you and any scientist would have in common.

Formulating a proper question or a hypothesis is perhaps the most difficult step. Recall that the hypothesis is not really a question but an answer. The question is the wonder about something; the hypothesis is a testable answer to that question. It is not THE answer, just a reasonable one posed in such a way that an experiment can be conducted to ascertain its validity. You may see this step expressed as making a guess; but consider that after he or she has completed the step described above—learning everything written about a subject—the scientist is in a position to make a pretty good guess. This step could be difficult for the scientist because he or she must have in mind one or more experiments to conduct to test the hypothesis. This step may be difficult for you for the same reason, and because it probably feels odd to answer a question before investigating it. The hypothesis step is included in the scientific method to promote intellectual honesty and to allow others to better understand a scientist's reasoning when reviewing what was done and how a conclusion was reached. Compare these scenarios:
 * Conversation over a radio from technician defusing a bomb –

 * OK. I have the device out. There are two black wires and a red one to the timer. Let me try this...!

Or

 * OK. I have the device out. There are two black wires and a red one to the timer.
 * I think the red one controls the detonation (Hypothesis: An intact red wire is necessary for detonation)
 * I am going to cut the red wire (Testing the hypothesis)
 * oops

In the absence of any further report from this technician, only the second procedure provides any information to the next technician faced with a second, similar bomb. He at least knows what not to do! Note also that the hypothesis is falsifiable. Testing demonstrated whether an intact red wire was or was not needed for detonation (apparently it controlled the undetonated state). Framing the hypothesis thusly: the red wire serves a purpose cannot be proven false; what test could you devise to satisfactorily demonstrate it has no purpose? It may in fact have no purpose (not in the example above), but eliminating by testing every possible purpose under the sun is an unsatisfactory approach.

1-3. When you catch a cold a virus has infected your body. Why do you think there is reason to question whether the virus is living or not? After all, if you took some ricinin (a plant poison), you would get very sick, but no one would suggest the toxin were alive or that the plant had entered your body.

Ricinin is an alkaloid and, along with the toxalbumin ricin (a plant protein), constitute extremely toxic substances found in the seeds of the castor bean (Ricinus communis) plant. Were you to ingest several raw seeds, you would experience nausea and vomiting, stomachache, bloody diarrhea, headache, cold sweat, sleepiness, disorientation, fever, shortage of breath, seizures, and possibly collapse and death. While there are a number of different ways that a virus could enter your body, the most common would be breathing in virus particles while in the presence of an infected person. The outcome of such exposure could be pretty much the same as that described for ricinin ingestion, depending upon the type of virus and your body's ability to respond appropriately to the "infection". Or, perhaps the infection you "catch" is cholera—the Vibrio cholerae bacterium. These bacteria are typically ingested in drinking water contaminated by improper sanitation. Again, you might display many of the same symptoms described, including the really unpleasant part about dying. The point here is to consider which of these problems constitute an "attack" by another living organism and which represent simply a poisoning of your living body by a non-living chemical. You cannot use the resulting symptoms as an indication because....; well, because they are just symptoms: what you "feel" as your body reacts to the chemical or biological attack.

In the case of ricin, this protein inhibits protein synthesis within the cells of the body. Organ damage results. Vibrio cholerae in the body produce a chemical that results in a loss of fluid and salts across the lining of the gut. The resulting diarrhea allows the bacterium to spread to other people under unsanitary conditions, and can result in death due to dehydration (an inability to retain water). So both the non-living chemical and the living bacterium cause illness by toxicity to our bodily functions.

You should recognize one pretty significant difference between an illness caused by a living organisms and an illness caused by a non-living, but toxic, chemical. In the latter case, the severity of our symptoms will be pretty much dependent upon the dose of toxin we ingest. There will be just so much chemical entering the body, and the damage should be proportional to that amount. In the case of the bacterium, something like a million cells need to be ingested to result in an infection, but once established, the living organism is a tiny factory that cranks out toxin and reproduces more identical factories (more cells) that themselves produce toxin. So the dose of toxin we get from the bacterial infection is not obviously limited. Living cells metabolize (break down and produce chemicals for various purposes) and reproduce (increase their numbers).

In essence, this is what is meant by an infection: another life form has taken up residence in or on our body, and is utilizing organic substances that are a part of our life processes to carry out its life functions, to further its existence and numbers. In the case of chlorea, the bacterium has some nasty habits that make us very ill; but there are a number of other bacteria (Escherichi coli, for example) that live in perfect harmony within or digetive tract and help us digest food. So not every "alien" that invades our body necessarily causes an infection.

<< Chapter 1

title: Botany/Introduction discussion


text:
Lojban/Dates

There are two systems of naming months in use: one based on the zodiac, and one based on numbers. The place structure is "x1 is foomonth in year x2 in calendar x3"; this is not according to jvojva but makes it easy to specify dates as "the day nth of the foomonth of the year mmmm".

There are also systems of naming the days of the week based on Oriental elements and numbers.

Note that Sunday in Lojban is either day seven or day zero, depending on your perspective.

title: Lojban/Dates


text:
Lojban/Directions

< Lojban

N      north                 berti               B       0°00' NbE    north by east         bersunberberti      BDBB    11°15' NNE    north northeast       bersunberti         BDB     22°30' NEbN   northeast by north    bersunberstuna      BDBD    33°45' NE     northeast             berstuna            BD      45°00' NEbE   northeast by east     bersunsunberti      BDDB    56°15' ENE    east northeast        bersunstuna         BDD     67°30' EbN    east by north         bersunsunstuna      BDDD    78°45' | E       east                  stuna               D       90°00' EbS    east by south         nansunsunstuna      NDDD    101°15' ESE    east southeast        nansunstuna         NDD     112°30' SEbE   southeast by east     nansunsunsnanu      NDDN    123°45' SE     southeast             nanstuna            ND      135°00' SEbS   southeast by south    nansunynanstuna     NDND    146°15' SSE    south southeast       nansunsnanu         NDN     157°30' SbE    south by east         nansunynansnanu     NDNN    168°45' | S       south                 snanu               N       180°00' SbW    south by west         nansicnansnanu      NVNN    191°15' SSW    south southwest       nansicysnanu        NVN     202°30' SWbS   southwest by south    nansicnanstici      NVNV    213°45' SW     southwest             nanstici            NV      225°00' SWbW   southwest by west     nansicysicysnanu    NVVN    236°15' WSW    west southwest        nansicystici        NVV     247°30' WbS    west by south         nansicysicystici    NVVV    258°45' | W       west                  stici               V       270°00' WbN    west by north         bersicysicystici    BVVV    281°15' WNW    west northwest        bersicystici        BVV     292°30' NWbW   northwest by west     bersicysicyberti    BVVB    303°45' NW     northwest             berstici            BV      315°00' NWbN   northwest by north    bersicyberstici     BVBV    326°15' NNW    north northwest       bersicyberti        BVB     337°30' NbW    north by west         bersicyberberti     BVBB    348°45'

title: Lojban/Directions


text:
Lojban/Le ninmu cu te dunda le ninmu le gerku

Lojban
le ninmu cu te dunda le gerku

.uinaicaidai zo'e na prami le ninmu .i .a'ucu'idai le ninmu cu na junri zo'e .i .u'icu'idai le ninmu na cmila .i .iucu'idai le ninmu cu na prami zo'e

.i .a'odai le nanmu cu klama le ninmu la kentykis. .i .i'odai le nanmu cu dunda le gerku le ninmu .i .oidai le nanmu cu klama la kentykis. le ninmu

.i .uiru'edai le gerku cu prami le ninmu .i .a'uru'edai le ninmu cu junri le gerku .i .u'idai le ninmu cu cmila .i .iucaidai le ninmu cu prami le gerku

English
The Woman Receives a Dog

Sadness! The woman is not loved. Disinterest! The woman doesn't have a gravity for anything. No amusement! The woman doesn't laugh. No love! The woman doesn't love.

Hope! The man goes to the woman from Kentucky. Appreciation! The man gives the dog to the woman. Complaint! The man goes to Kentucky from the woman.

A little happiness! The dog loves the woman. A little interest! The woman has a gravity for the dog. Amusement! The woman laughs. Lots of love! The woman loves the dog.


text:
US History/New Nation

The Articles of Confederation
(The following text is taken from Wikipedia)

The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union, also the Articles of Confederation, was the governing constitution of the alliance of thirteen independent and sovereign states styled "United States of America." The Article's ratification (proposed in 1777) was completed in 1782, legally uniting the states by compact into the "United States of America" as a union with a confederation government. Under the Articles (and the succeeding Constitution) the states retained sovereignty over all governmental functions not specifically deputed to the confederation.

The final draft of the Articles was written in the summer of 1777 and adopted by the Second Continental Congress on November 15, 1777 in York, Pennsylvania after a year of debate. In practice the final draft of the Articles served as the de facto system of government used by the Congress ("the United States in Congress assembled") until it became de jure by final ratification on March 1, 1781; at which point Congress became the Congress of the Confederation. The Articles set the rules for operations of the "United States" confederation. The confederation was capable of making war, negotiating diplomatic agreements, and resolving issues regarding the western territories; it could mint coins and borrow inside and outside the United States. An important element of the Articles was that Article XIII stipulated that "their provisions shall be inviolably observed by every state" and "the Union shall be perpetual." This article was put to the test in the American Civil War.

The Articles were created by the chosen representatives of the states in the Second Continental Congress out of a perceived need to have "a plan of confederacy for securing the freedom, sovereignty, and independence of the United States." Although serving a crucial role in the attainment of nationhood for the thirteen states, a group of reformers, known as "federalists", felt that the Articles lacked the necessary provisions for a sufficiently effective government. Fundamentally, a federation was sought to replace the confederation. The key criticism by those who favored a more powerful central state (i.e. the federalists) was that the government (i.e. the Congress of the Confederation) lacked taxing authority; it had to request funds from the states. Another criticism of the Articles was that they did not strike the right balance between large and small states in the legislative decision making process. Due to its one-state, one-vote plank, the larger states were expected to contribute more but had only one vote. The Articles were replaced by the United States Constitution on June 21, 1788.

Background
The political push for the colonies to increase cooperation began in the French and Indian Wars in the mid 1750s. The opening of the American Revolutionary War in 1775 induced the various states to cooperate in seceding from the British Empire. The Second Continental Congress starting 1775 acted as the confederation organ that ran the war. Congress presented the Articles for enactment by the states in 1777, while prosecuting the American Revolutionary war against the Kingdom of Great Britain.

Ratification
Congress began to move for ratification of the Articles in 1777: The articles can always be candidly reviewed under a sense of the difficulty of combining in one general system the various sentiments and interests of a continent divided into so many sovereign and independent communities, under a conviction of the absolute necessity of uniting all our councils and all our strength, to maintain and defend our common liberties...

The document could not become officially effective until it was ratified by all of the thirteen colonies. The first state to ratify was Virginia on December 16, 1777. The process dragged on for several years, stalled by the refusal of some states to rescind their claims to land in the West. Maryland was the last holdout; it refused to go along until Virginia and New York agreed to cede their claims in the Ohio River valley. A little over three years passed before Maryland's ratification on March 1, 1781.

Article summaries
Even though the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution were established by many of the same people, the two documents were very different. The original five-paged Articles contained thirteen articles, a conclusion, and a signatory section. The following list contains short summaries of each of the thirteen articles.

 * 1) Establishes the name of the confederation as "The United States of America."
 * 2) Asserts the precedence of the separate states over the confederation government, i.e. "Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated."
 * 3) Establishes the United States as a league of states united ". . . for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them . . . ."
 * 4) Establishes freedom of movement–anyone can pass freely between states, excluding "paupers, vagabonds, and fugitives from justice." All people are entitled to the rights established by the state into which he travels. If a crime is committed in one state and the perpetrator flees to another state, he will be extradited to and tried in the state in which the crime was committed.
 * 5) Allocates one vote in the Congress of the Confederation (United States in Congress Assembled) to each state, which was entitled to a delegation of between two and seven members. Members of Congress were appointed by state legislatures; individuals could not serve more than three out of any six years.
 * 6) Only the central government is allowed to conduct foreign relations and to declare war. No states may have navies or standing armies, or engage in war, without permission of Congress (although the state militias are encouraged).
 * 7) When an army is raised for common defense, colonels and military ranks below colonel will be named by the state legislatures.
 * 8) Expenditures by the United States will be paid by funds raised by state legislatures, and apportioned to the states based on the real property values of each.
 * 9) Defines the powers of the central government: to declare war, to set weights and measures (including coins), and for Congress to serve as a final court for disputes between states.
 * 10) Defines a Committee of the States to be a government when Congress is not in session.
 * 11) Requires nine states to approve the admission of a new state into the confederacy; pre-approves Canada, if it applies for membership.
 * 12) Reaffirms that the Confederation accepts war debt incurred by Congress before the Articles.
 * 13) Declares that the Articles are perpetual, and can only be altered by approval of Congress with ratification by all the state legislatures.

Still at war with the Kingdom of Great Britain, the colonists were reluctant to establish another powerful national government. Jealously guarding their new independence, members of the Continental Congress created a loosely-structured unicameral legislature that protected the liberty of the individual states. While calling on Congress to regulate military and monetary affairs, for example, the Articles of Confederation provided no mechanism to force the states to comply with requests for troops or revenue. At times, this left the military in a precarious position, as George Washington wrote in a 1781 letter to the governor of Massachusetts, John Hancock.

The end of the war
The Treaty of Paris (1783), which ended hostilities with Great Britain, languished in Congress for months because state representatives failed to attend sessions of the national legislature. Yet Congress had no power to enforce attendance. Writing to George Clinton in September 1783, George Washington complained:

 * Congress have come to no determination yet respecting the Peace Establishment nor am I able to say when they will. I have lately had a conference with a Committee on this subject, and have reiterated my former opinions, but it appears to me that there is not a sufficient representation to discuss Great National points.

Function
The Articles supported the Congressional direction of the Continental Army, and allowed the 13 states to present a unified front when dealing with the European powers. As a tool to build a centralized war-making government, they were largely a failure, but since guerrilla warfare was correct strategy in a war against the British Empire's army, this "failure" succeeded in winning independence. Under the articles, Congress could make decisions, but had no power to enforce them. There was a requirement for unanimous approval before any modifications could be made to the Articles. Because the majority of lawmaking rested with the states, the central government was also kept limited.

Congress was denied the power of taxation: it could only request money from the states. The states did not generally comply with the requests in full, leaving the confederation chronically short of funds. Congress was also denied the power to regulate commerce, and as a result, the states fought over trade as well. The states and the national congress had both incurred debts during the war, and how to pay the debts became a major issue. Some states paid off their debts; however, the centralizers favored federal assumption of states' debts.

Nevertheless, the Congress of the Confederation did take two actions with lasting impact. The Land Ordinance of 1785 established the general land survey and ownership provisions used throughout later American expansion. The Northwest Ordinance of 1787 noted the agreement of the original states to give up western land claims and cleared the way for the entry of new states.

Once the war was won, the Continental Army was largely disbanded. A very small national force was maintained to man frontier forts and protect against Indian attacks. Meanwhile, each of the states had an army (or militia), and 11 of them had navies. The wartime promises of bounties and land grants to be paid for service were not being met. In 1783, Washington defused the Newburgh conspiracy, but riots by unpaid Pennsylvania veterans forced the Congress to leave Philadelphia temporarily.

Signatures
The Second Continental Congress approved the Articles for distribution to the states on November 15 1777. A copy was made for each state and one was kept by the Congress. The copies sent to the states for ratification were unsigned, and a cover letter had only the signatures of Henry Laurens and Charles Thomson, who were the president and secretary to the Congress.

But, the Articles at that time were unsigned, and the date was blank. Congress began the signing process by examining their copy of the Articles on June 27 1778. They ordered a final copy prepared (the one in the National Archives), and that delegates should inform the secretary of their authority for ratification.

On July 9, 1778, the prepared copy was ready. They dated it, and began to sign. They also requested each of the remaining states to notify its delegation when ratification was completed. On that date, delegates present from New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia and South Carolina signed the Articles to indicate that their states had ratified. New Jersey, Delaware and Maryland could not, since their states had not ratified. North Carolina and Georgia also didn't sign that day, since their delegations were absent.

After the first signing, some delegates signed at the next meeting they attended. For example, John Wentworth of New Hampshire added his name on August 8. John Penn was the first of North Carolina's delegates to arrive (on July 10), and the delegation signed the Articles on July 21 1778.

The other states had to wait until they ratified the Articles and notified their Congressional delegation. Georgia signed on July 24, New Jersey on November 26, and Delaware on February 12 1779. Maryland refused to ratify the Articles until every state had ceded its western land claims.

On February 2, 1781, the much-awaited decision was taken by the Maryland General Assembly in Annapolis. As the last piece of business during the afternoon Session, "among engrossed Bills" was "signed and sealed by Governor Thomas Sim Lee in the Senate Chamber, in the presence of the members of both Houses… an Act to empower the delegates of this state in Congress to subscribe and ratify the articles of confederation" and perpetual union among the states. The Senate then adjourned "to the first Monday in August next." The decision of Maryland to ratify the Articles was reported to the Continental Congress on February 12. The formal signing of the Articles by the Maryland delegates took place in Philadelphia at noon time on March 1, 1781 and was celebrated in the afternoon. With these events, the Articles entered into force and the United States came into being as a united, sovereign and national state.

Congress had debated the Articles for over a year and a half, and the ratification process had taken nearly three and a half years. Many participants in the original debates were no longer delegates, and some of the signers had only recently arrived. The Articles of Confederation and Perpetual Union were signed by a group of men who were never present in the Congress at the same time.

The signers and the states they represented were:
 * New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett and John Wentworth Jr.
 * Massachusetts Bay: John Hancock, Samuel Adams, Elbridge Gerry, Francis Dana, James Lovell, and Samuel Holten
 * Rhode Island and Providence Plantations: William Ellery, Henry Marchant, and John Collins
 * Connecticut: Roger Sherman¹, Samuel Huntington, Oliver Wolcott, Titus Hosmer, and Andrew Adams
 * New York: James Duane, Francis Lewis, William Duer, and Gouverneur Morris
 * New Jersey: John Witherspoon and Nathaniel Scudder
 * Pennsylvania:Robert Morris², Daniel Roberdeau, Jonathan Bayard Smith, William Clingan, and Joseph Reed
 * Delaware: Thomas McKean, John Dickinson³, and Nicholas Van Dyke
 * Maryland: John Hanson and Daniel Carroll³
 * Virginia: Richard Henry Lee, John Banister, Thomas Adams, John Harvie, and Francis Lightfoot Lee
 * North Carolina: John Penn, Cornelius Harnett, and John Williams
 * South Carolina: Henry Laurens, William Henry Drayton, John Mathews, Richard Hutson, and Thomas Heyward Jr.
 * Georgia: John Walton, Edward Telfair, and Edward Langworthy

 * ¹ The only person to sign all four great state papers of the United States: the Articles of Association, the United States Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution.
 * ² One of only 2 people to sign three of the great state papers of the United States: the United States Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution.
 * ³ One of only 4 people to sign both the Articles of Confederation and the United States Constitution.

Presidents of the Congress
The following list is of those who led the Congress of the Confederation under the Articles of Confederation as the presidents of the United States in Congress Assembled. Under the Articles, the president was the presiding officer of Congress, chaired the Cabinet (the Committee of the States) when Congress was in recess, and performed other administrative functions. He was not, however, a chief executive in the way the successor President of the United States is a chief executive, but all of the functions he executed were under the auspices and in service of the Congress.

For a full list of presidents of the Congress Assembled and presidents under the two Continental Congresses before the Articles, see President of the Continental Congress.
 * Samuel Huntington (March 1, 1781 – July 9, 1781)
 * Thomas McKean (July 10, 1781 – November 4, 1781)
 * John Hanson (November 5, 1781 – November 3, 1782)
 * Elias Boudinot (November 4, 1782 – November 2, 1783)
 * Thomas Mifflin (November 3, 1783 – October 31, 1784)
 * Richard Henry Lee (November 30, 1784 – November 6, 1785)
 * John Hancock (November 23, 1785 – May 29, 1786)
 * Nathaniel Gorham (June 6, 1786 – November 5, 1786)
 * Arthur St. Clair (February 2, 1787 – November 4, 1787)
 * Cyrus Griffin (January 22, 1788 – November 2, 1788)

Revision and replacement
In May 1786, Charles Pinckney of South Carolina proposed that Congress revise the Articles of Confederation. Recommended changes included granting Congress power over foreign and domestic commerce, and providing means for Congress to collect money from state treasuries. Unanimous approval was necessary to make the alterations, however, and Congress failed to reach a consensus.

In September, five states assembled in the Annapolis Convention to discuss adjustments that would improve commerce. Under their chairman, Alexander Hamilton, they invited state representatives to convene in Philadelphia to discuss improvements to the federal government. Although the states' representatives to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia were only authorized to amend the Articles, the representatives held secret, closed-door sessions and wrote a new constitution. The new Constitution gave much more power to the central government, but characterization of the result is disputed. Historian Forrest McDonald, using the ideas of James Madison from Federalist 39, describes the change this way:

"The constitutional reallocation of powers created a new form of government, unprecedented under the sun. Every previous national authority either had been centralized or else had been a confederation of sovereign states. The new American system was neither one nor the other; it was a mixture of both."

Historian Ralph Ketcham comments on the opinions of Patrick Henry, George Mason, and other antifederalists who were not so eager to give up the local autonomy won by the revolution:

"Antifederalists feared what Patrick Henry termed the "consolidated government" proposed by the new Constitution. They saw in Federalist hopes for commercial growth and international prestige only the lust of ambitious men for a "splendid empire" that, in the time-honored way of empires, would oppress the people with taxes, conscription, and military campaigns. Uncertain that any government over so vast a domain as the United States could be controlled by the people, Antifederalists saw in the enlarged powers of the general government only the familiar threats to the rights and liberties of the people."

According to their own terms for modification (Article XIII), the Articles would still have been in effect until 1790, the year in which the last of the 13 states ratified the new Constitution. The Congress under the Articles continued to sit until November 1788,   overseeing the adoption of the new Constitution by the states, and setting elections.

Historians have given many reasons for the perceived need to replace the articles in 1787. Jillson and Wilson (1994) point to the financial weakness as well as the norms, rules and institutional structures of the Congress, and the propensity to divide along sectional lines.

Rakove (1988) identifies several factors that explain the collapse of the Confederation. The lack of compulsory direct taxation power was objectionable to those wanting a strong centralized state or expecting to benefit from such power. It could not collect customs after the war because tariffs were vetoed by Rhode Island. Rakove concludes that their failure to implement national measures "stemmed not from a heady sense of independence but rather from the enormous difficulties that all the states encountered in collecting taxes, mustering men, and gathering supplies from a war-weary populace." The second group of factors Rakove identified derived from the substantive nature of the problems the Continental Congress confronted after 1783, especially the inability to create a strong foreign policy. Finally, the Confederation's lack of coercive power reduced the likelihood for profit to be made by political means, thus potential rulers were uninspired to seek power.

When the war ended in 1783, certain special interests had incentives to create a new "merchant state," much like the British state people had rebelled against. In particular, holders of war scrip and land speculators wanted a central government to pay off scrip at face value and to legalize western land holdings with disputed claims. Also, manufacturers wanted a high tariff as a barrier to foreign goods, but competition among states made this impossible without a central government.

Historical importance
The Articles are historically important for two major reasons: i) they were the first constitution or governing document for the United States of America and ii) they legally established a union of the thirteen founding states; a Perpetual Union. Early on, tensions developed surrounding the Union, not least because of the fact that with the US Constitution the basis of government was changed from that of confederation to federation. Thomas Jefferson and John C. Calhoun were in their time leading proponents of guaranteeing the constitutional rights of states in federal legislation. Over time, a legal view developed that if the union violated the constitutional rights of states they might rightfully seceed. A significant tension in the 19th century surrounded the expansion of slavery (which was generally supported in agricultural Southern states and opposed in industrial Northern states). As the secessionist view gained support in the South, the opposing view in the North was that since the U.S. Constitution declared itself to be "a more perfect union" than the Articles, it too must be perpetual, and also could not be broken without the consent of the other states. This view was promoted by Daniel Webster and Abraham Lincoln. In 1861, these constitutional contracts were cited by President Lincoln against any claims by the seceding states that unilaterally withdrawing from the Union and taking federal property within those states was legal.

The Northwest Ordinance
The Congress established the Northwest Territory around the Great Lakes between 1784 and 1787. In 1787, Congress passed the Northwest Ordinance banning slavery in the new Territory. Congressional legislation divided the Territory into townships of six square miles each and provided for the sale of land to settlers. The Northwest Territory would eventually become the states of Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana, Illinois and Michigan.

Problems with the Confederation
The Confederation faced several difficulties in its early years. Firstly, Congress became extremely dependent on the states for income. Also, states refused to require its citizens to pay debts to British merchants, straining relations with Great Britain. France prohibited Americans from using the important port of New Orleans, crippling American trade down the Mississippi river.

Shays' Rebellion
Due to the post-revolution economic woes, agitated by inflation, many worried of social instability. This was especially true for those in Massachusetts. The legislature's response to the shaky economy was to put emphasis on maintaining a sound currency by paying off the state debt through levying massive taxes. The tax burden hit those with moderate incomes dramatically. The average farmer paid a third of their annual income to these taxes from 1780 to 1786. Those who couldn't pay had their property foreclosed and were thrown into crowded prisons filled with other debtors.

But in the summer of 1786, a revolutionary war veteran named Daniel Shays began to organize western communities in Massachusetts to stop foreclosures, with force, by prohibiting the courts from holding their proceedings. Later that fall, Shays marched the newly formed "rebellion" into Springfield to stop the state supreme court from gathering. The state responded with troops sent to suppress the rebellion. After a failed attempt by the rebels to attack the Springfield arsenal, and other small skirmishes, the rebels retreated and then uprising collapsed. Shays retreated to Vermont by 1787.

While Daniel Shays was in hiding, the government condemned him to death on the charge of treason. Shays pleaded for his life in a petition which was finally granted by John Hancock on June 17, 1788. With the threat of treason behind him, Shays moved to New York and died September 25, 1825

U.S. presidents before George Washington
Who was the first president of the United States? Ask any school child and they will readily tell you "George Washington." And of course, they would be correct—at least technically. Washington was inaugurated on April 30, 1789, and yet, the United States continually had functioning governments from as early as September 5, 1774, and operated as a confederated nation from as early as July 4, 1776. During that nearly fifteen-year interval, Congress—first the Continental Congress and then later the Confederation Congress—was always moderated by a duly elected president. This officer was known as the "President of the Continental Congress", and later as the "President of the United States, in Congress Assembled".

However, the office of President of the Continental Congress had very little relationship to the office of President of the United States beyond the name. The president of the United States is the head of the executive branch of government, while the president of the Continental Congress was merely the chair of a body that most resembled a legislature, although it possessed legislative, executive, and judicial powers. The following brief biographies profile these "forgotten presidents."

Peyton Randolph of Virginia (1723–1775) When delegates gathered in Philadelphia for the first Continental Congress, they promptly elected the former King's Attorney of Virginia as the moderator and president of their convocation. He was a propitious choice. He was a legal prodigy—having studied at the Inner Temple in London, served as his native colony's Attorney General, and tutored many of the most able men of the South at William and Mary College—including the young Patrick Henry. His home in Williamsburg was the gathering place for Virginia's legal and political gentry—and it remains a popular attraction in the restored colonial capital. He had served as a delegate in the Virginia House of Burgesses, and had been a commander under William Byrd in the colonial militia. He was a scholar of some renown—having begun a self-guided reading of the classics when he was thirteen. Despite suffering poor health served the Continental Congress as president twice, in 1774 from September 5 to October 21, and then again for a few days in 1775 from May 10 to May 23. He never lived to see independence, yet was numbered among the nation's most revered founders.

Henry Middleton (1717–1784) America's second elected president was one of the wealthiest planters in the South, the patriarch of the most powerful families anywhere in the nation. His public spirit was evident from an early age. He was a member of his state's Common House from 1744 to 1747. During the last two years he served as the Speaker. During 1755 he was the King's Commissioner of Indian Affairs. He was a member of the South Carolina Council from 1755 to 1770. His valor in the War with the Cherokees during 1760–1761 earned him wide recognition throughout the colonies—and demonstrated his leadership abilities while under pressure. He was elected as a delegate to the first session of the Continental Congress and when Peyton Randolph was forced to resign the presidency, his peers immediately turned to Middleton to complete the term. He served as the fledgling coalition's president from October 22, 1774, until Randolph was able to resume his duties briefly beginning on May 10, 1775. Afterward, he was a member of the Congressional Council of Safety and helped to establish the young nation's policy toward the encouragement and support of education. In February 1776 he resigned his political involvements in order to prepare his family and lands for what he believed was inevitable war—but he was replaced by his son Arthur who eventually became a signer of both the Declaration of Independence and the Articles of Confederation, served time as an English prisoner of war, and was twice elected Governor of his state.

John Hancock (1737–1793) The third president was a patriot, rebel leader, merchant who signed his name into immortality in giant strokes on the Declaration of Independence on July 4, 1776. The boldness of his signature has made it live in American minds as a perfect expression of the strength and freedom—and defiance—of the individual in the face of British tyranny. As President of the Continental Congress during two widely spaced terms—the first from May 24 1775 to October 30 1777 and the second from November 23, 1785, to June 5, 1786—Hancock was the presiding officer when the members approved the Declaration of Independence. Because of his position, it was his official duty to sign the document first—but not necessarily as dramatically as he did. Hancock figured prominently in another historic event—the battle at Lexington: British troops who fought there April 10, 1775, had known Hancock and Samuel Adams were in Lexington and had come there to capture these rebel leaders. And the two would have been captured, if they had not been warned by Paul Revere. As early as 1768, Hancock defied the British by refusing to pay customs charges on the cargo of one of his ships. One of Boston's wealthiest merchants, he was recognized by the citizens, as well as by the British, as a rebel leader—and was elected President of the first Massachusetts Provincial Congress. After he was chosen President of the Continental Congress in 1775, Hancock became known beyond the borders of Massachusetts, and, having served as colonel of the Massachusetts Governor's Guards he hoped to be named commander of the American forces—until John Adams nominated George Washington. In 1778 Hancock was commissioned Major General and took part in an unsuccessful campaign in Rhode Island. But it was as a political leader that his real distinction was earned—as the first Governor of Massachusetts, as President of Congress, and as President of the Massachusetts constitutional ratification convention. He helped win ratification in Massachusetts, gaining enough popular recognition to make him a contender for the newly created Presidency of the United States, but again he saw Washington gain the prize. Like his rival, George Washington, Hancock was a wealthy man who risked much for the cause of independence. He was the wealthiest New Englander supporting the patriotic cause, and, although he lacked the brilliance of John Adams or the capacity to inspire of Samuel Adams, he became one of the foremost leaders of the new nation—perhaps, in part, because he was willing to commit so much at such risk to the cause of freedom.

Henry Laurens (1724–1792) The only American president ever to be held as a prisoner of war by a foreign power, Laurens was heralded after he was released as "the father of our country," by no less a personage than George Washington. He was of Huguenot extraction, his ancestors having come to America from France after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes made the Reformed faith illegal. Raised and educated for a life of mercantilism at his home in Charleston, he also had the opportunity to spend more than a year in continental travel. It was while in Europe that he began to write revolutionary pamphlets—gaining him renown as a patriot. He served as vice-president of South Carolina in 1776. He was then elected to the Continental Congress. He succeeded John Hancock as President of the newly independent but war beleaguered United States on November 1, 1777. He served until December 9, 1778, at which time he was appointed Ambassador to the Netherlands. Unfortunately for the cause of the young nation, he was captured by an English warship during his cross-Atlantic voyage and was confined to the Tower of London until the end of the war. After the Battle of Yorktown, the American government regained his freedom in a dramatic prisoner exchange—President Laurens for Lord Cornwallis. Ever the patriot, Laurens continued to serve his nation as one of the three representatives selected to negotiate terms at the Paris Peace Conference in 1782.

John Jay (1745–1829) America's first Secretary of State, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, one of its first ambassadors, and author of some of the celebrated Federalist Papers, Jay was a Founding Father who, by a quirk of fate, missed signing the Declaration of Independence—at the time of the vote for independence and the signing, he had temporarily left the Continental Congress to serve in New York's revolutionary legislature. Nevertheless, he was chosen by his peers to succeed Henry Laurens as President of the United States—serving a term from December 10, 1778, to September 27, 1779. A conservative New York lawyer who was at first against the idea of independence for the colonies, the aristocratic Jay in 1776 turned into a patriot who was willing to give the next twenty-five years of his life to help establish the new nation. During those years, he won the regard of his peers as a dedicated and accomplished statesman and a man of unwavering principle. In the Continental Congress Jay prepared addresses to the people of Canada and Great Britain. In New York he drafted the State constitution and served as Chief Justice during the war. He was President of the Continental Congress before he undertook the difficult assignment, as ambassador, of trying to gain support and funds from Spain. After helping Franklin, Jefferson, Adams, and Laurens complete peace negotiations in Paris in 1783, Jay returned to become the first Secretary of State, called "Secretary of Foreign Affairs" under the Articles of Confederation. He negotiated valuable commercial treaties with Russia and Morocco, and dealt with the continuing controversy with Britain and Spain over the southern and western boundaries of the United States. He proposed that America and Britain establish a joint commission to arbitrate disputes that remained after the war—a proposal which, though not adopted, influenced the government's use of arbitration and diplomacy in settling later international problems. In this post Jay felt keenly the weakness of the Articles of Confederation and was one of the first to advocate a new governmental compact. He wrote five Federalist Papers supporting the Constitution, and he was a leader in the New York ratification convention. As first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, Jay made the historic decision that a State could be sued by a citizen from another State, which led to the Eleventh Amendment to the Constitution. On a special mission to London he concluded the "Jay Treaty," which helped avert a renewal of hostilities with Britain but won little popular favor at home—and it is probably for this treaty that this Founding Father is best remembered. Samuel Huntington (1732–1796) An industrious youth who mastered his studies of the law without the advantage of a school, a tutor, or a master—borrowing books and snatching opportunities to read and research between odd jobs—he was one of the greatest self-made men among the Founders. He was also one of the greatest legal minds of the age—all the more remarkable for his lack of advantage as a youth. In 1764, in recognition of his obvious abilities and initiative, he was elected to the General Assembly of Connecticut. The next year he was chosen to serve on the Executive Council. In 1774 he was appointed Associate Judge of the Superior Court and, as a delegate to the Continental Congress, was acknowledged to be a legal scholar of some respect. He served in Congress for five consecutive terms, during the last of which he was elected President. He served in that office from September 28, 1779 until ill health forced him to resign on July 9, 1781. He returned to his home in Connecticut—and as he recuperated, he accepted more Councilor and Bench duties. He again took his seat in Congress in 1783, but left it to become Chief Justice of his state's Superior Court. He was elected Lieutenant Governor in 1785 and Governor in 1786. According to John Jay, he was "the most precisely trained Christian jurists ever to serve his country."

Thomas McKean (1734–1817) During his astonishingly varied fifty-year career in public life he held almost every possible position—from deputy county attorney to President of the United States under the Confederation. Besides signing the Declaration of Independence, he contributed significantly to the development and establishment of constitutional government in both his home state of Delaware and the nation. At the Stamp Act Congress he proposed the voting procedure that Congress adopted: that each colony, regardless of size or population, has one vote—the practice adopted by the Continental Congress and the Congress of the Confederation, and the principle of state equality manifest in the composition of the Senate. And as county judge in 1765, he defied the British by ordering his court to work only with documents that did not bear the hated stamps. In June 1776, at the Continental Congress, McKean joined with Caesar Rodney to register Delaware's approval of the Declaration of Independence, over the negative vote of the third Delaware delegate, George Read—permitting it to be "The unanimous declaration of the thirteen United States." And at a special Delaware convention, he drafted the constitution for that State. McKean also helped draft—and signed—the Articles of Confederation. It was during his tenure of service as President—from July 10, 1781 to November 4, 1782—when news arrived from General Washington in October 1781 that the British had surrendered following the Battle of Yorktown. As Chief Justice of the supreme court of Pennsylvania, he contributed to the establishment of the legal system in that State, and, in 1787, he strongly supported the Constitution at the Pennsylvania Ratification Convention, declaring it "the best the world has yet seen." At sixty-five, after over forty years of public service, McKean resigned from his post as Chief Justice. A candidate on the Democratic-Republican ticket in 1799, McKean was elected Governor of Pennsylvania. As Governor, he followed such a strict policy of appointing only fellow Republicans to office that he became the father of the spoils system in America. He served three tempestuous terms as Governor, completing one of the longest continuous careers of public service of any of the Founding Fathers.

John Hanson (1715–1783) He was the heir of one of the greatest family traditions in the colonies and became the patriarch of a long line of American patriots—his great grandfather died at Lutzen beside the great King Gustavus Aldophus of Sweden; his grandfather was one of the founders of New Sweden along the Delaware River in Maryland; one of his nephews was the military secretary to George Washington; another was a signer of the Declaration; still another was a signer of the Constitution; yet another was Governor of Maryland during the Revolution; and still another was a member of the first Congress; two sons were killed in action with the Continental Army; a grandson served as a member of Congress under the new Constitution; and another grandson was a Maryland Senator. Thus, even if Hanson had not served as President himself, he would have greatly contributed to the life of the nation through his ancestry and progeny. As a youngster he began a self-guided reading of classics and rather quickly became an acknowledged expert in the juridicalism of Anselm and the practical philosophy of Seneca—both of which were influential in the development of the political philosophy of the great leaders of the Reformation. It was based upon these legal and theological studies that the young planter—his farm, Mulberry Grove was just across the Potomac from Mount Vernon—began to espouse the cause of the patriots. In 1775 he was elected to the Provincial Legislature of Maryland. Then in 1777, he became a member of Congress where he distinguished himself as a brilliant administrator. Thus, he was elected President in 1781. He served in that office from November 5, 1781 until November 3, 1782. He was the first president to serve a full term after the full ratification of the Articles of Confederation—and like so many of the Southern and New England Founders, he was strongly opposed to the Constitution when it was first discussed. He remained a confirmed anti-federalist until his untimely death.

Elias Boudinot (1741–1802) He did not sign the Declaration, the Articles, or the Constitution. He did not serve in the Continental Army with distinction. He was not renowned for his legal mind or his political skills. He was instead a man who spent his entire career in foreign diplomacy. He earned the respect of his fellow patriots during the dangerous days following the traitorous action of Benedict Arnold. His deft handling of relations with Canada also earned him great praise. After being elected to the Congress from his home state of New Jersey, he served as the new nation's Secretary for Foreign Affairs—managing the influx of aid from France, Spain, and Holland. The in 1783 he was elected to the Presidency. He served in that office from November 4, 1782 until November 2, 1783. Like so many of the other early presidents, he was a classically trained scholar, of the Reformed faith, and an anti-federalist in political matters. He was the father and grandfather of frontiersmen—and one of his grandchildren and namesakes eventually became a leader of the Cherokee nation in its bid for independence from the sprawling expansion of the United States.

Thomas Mifflin (1744–1800) By an ironic sort of providence, Thomas Mifflin served as George Washington's first aide-de-camp at the beginning of the Revolutionary War, and, when the war was over, he was the man, as President of the United States, who accepted Washington's resignation of his commission. In the years between, Mifflin greatly served the cause of freedom—and, apparently, his own cause—while serving as the first Quartermaster General of the Continental Army. He obtained desperately needed supplies for the new army—and was suspected of making excessive profit himself. Although experienced in business and successful in obtaining supplies for the war, Mifflin preferred the front lines, and he distinguished himself in military actions on Long Island and near Philadelphia. Born and reared a Quaker, he was excluded from their meetings for his military activities. A controversial figure, Mifflin lost favor with Washington and was part of the Conway Cabal—a rather notorious plan to replace Washington with General Horatio Gates. And Mifflin narrowly missed court-martial action over his handling of funds by resigning his commission in 1778. In spite of these problems—and of repeated charges that he was a drunkard—Mifflin continued to be elected to positions of responsibility—as President and Governor of Pennsylvania, delegate to the Constitutional Convention, as well as the highest office in the land—where he served from November 3, 1783, to November 29, 1784. Most of Mifflin's significant contributions occurred in his earlier years—in the First and Second Continental Congresses he was firm in his stand for independence and for fighting for it, and he helped obtain both men and supplies for Washington's army in the early critical period. In 1784, as president, he signed the treaty with Great Britain which ended the war. Although a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, he did not make a significant contribution—beyond signing the document. As Governor of Pennsylvania, although he was accused of negligence, he supported improvements of roads, and reformed the State penal and judicial systems. He had gradually become sympathetic to Jefferson's principles regarding states' rights; even so, he directed the Pennsylvania militia to support the Federal tax collectors in the Whiskey Rebellion. In spite of charges of corruption, the affable Mifflin remained a popular figure. A magnetic personality and an effective speaker, he managed to hold a variety of elective offices for almost thirty years of the critical Revolutionary period.

Richard Henry Lee (1732–1794) His resolution "that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States", approved by the Continental Congress July 2, 1776, was the first official act of the United Colonies that set them irrevocably on the road to independence. It was not surprising that it came from Lee's pen—as early as 1768 he proposed the idea of committees of correspondence among the colonies, and in 1774 he proposed that the colonies meet in what became the Continental Congress. From the first, his eye was on independence. A wealthy Virginia planter whose ancestors had been granted extensive lands by King Charles II, Lee disdained the traditional aristocratic role and the aristocratic view. In the House of Burgesses he flatly denounced the practice of slavery. He saw independent America as "an asylum where the unhappy may find solace, and the persecuted repose." In 1764, when news of the proposed Stamp Act reached Virginia, Lee was a member of the committee of the House of Burgesses that drew up an address to the King, an official protest against such a tax. After the tax was established, Lee organized the citizens of his county into the Westmoreland Association, a group pledged to buy no British goods until the Stamp Act was repealed. At the First Continental Congress, Lee persuaded representatives from all the colonies to adopt this non-importation idea, leading to the formation of the Continental Association, which was one of the first steps toward union of the colonies. Lee also proposed to the First Continental Congress that a militia be organized and armed—the year before the first shots were fired at Lexington; but this and other proposals of his were considered too radical—at the time. Three days after Lee introduced his resolution, in June of 1776, he was appointed by Congress to the committee responsible for drafting a declaration of independence, but he was called home when his wife fell ill, and his place was taken by his young protégé, Thomas Jefferson. Thus Lee missed the chance to draft the document—though his influence greatly shaped it and he was able to return in time to sign it. He was elected President—serving from November 30, 1784 to November 22, 1785 when he was succeeded by the second administration of John Hancock. Elected to the Constitutional Convention, Lee refused to attend, but as a member of the Congress of the Confederation, he contributed to another great document, the Northwest Ordinance, which provided for the formation of new States from the Northwest Territory. When the completed Constitution was sent to the States for ratification, Lee opposed it as anti-democratic and anti-Christian. However, as one of Virginia's first Senators, he helped assure passage of the amendments that, he felt, corrected many of the document's gravest faults—the Bill of Rights. He was the great uncle of Robert E. Lee and the scion of a great family tradition.

Nathaniel Gorham (1738–1796) Another self-made man, Gorham was one of the many successful Boston merchants who risked all he had for the cause of freedom. He was first elected to the Massachusetts General Court in 1771. His honesty and integrity won his acclaim and was thus among the first delegates chose to serve in the Continental Congress. He remained in public service throughout the war and into the Constitutional period, though his greatest contribution was his call for a stronger central government. But even though he was an avid federalist, he did not believe that the union could—or even should—be maintained peaceably for more than a hundred years. He was convinced that eventually, in order to avoid civil or cultural war, smaller regional interests should pursue an independent course. His support of a new constitution was rooted more in pragmatism than ideology. When John Hancock was unable to complete his second term as President, Gorham was elected to succeed him—serving from June 6, 1786 to February 1, 1787. It was during this time that the Congress actually entertained the idea of asking Prince Henry—the brother of Frederick II of Prussia—and Bonnie Prince Charlie—the leader of the ill-fated Scottish Jacobite Rising and heir of the Stuart royal line—to consider the possibility of establishing a constitutional monarch in America. It was a plan that had much to recommend it but eventually the advocates of republicanism held the day. During the final years of his life, Gorham was concerned with several speculative land deals which nearly cost him his entire fortune.

Arthur St. Clair (1734–1818) Born and educated in Edinburgh, Scotland, during the tumultuous days of the final Jacobite Rising and the Tartan Suppression, St. Clair was the only president of the United States born and bred on foreign soil. Though most of his family and friends abandoned their devastated homeland in the years following the Battle of Culloden—after which nearly a third of the land was depopulated through emigration to America—he stayed behind to learn the ways of the hated Hanoverian English in the Royal Navy. His plan was to learn of the enemy's military might in order to fight another day. During the global conflict of the Seven Years' War—generally known as the French and Indian War—he was stationed in the American theater. Afterward, he decided to settle in Pennsylvania where many of his kin had established themselves. His civic-mindedness quickly became apparent: he helped to organize both the New Jersey and the Pennsylvania militias, led the Continental Army's Canadian expedition, and was elected Congress. His long years of training in the enemy camp was finally paying off. He was elected President in 1787—and he served from February 2 of that year until January 21 of the next. Following his term of duty in the highest office in the land, he became the first Governor of the Northwest Territory. Though he briefly supported the idea of creating a constitutional monarchy under the Stuart's Bonnie Prince Charlie, he was a strident Anti-Federalist—believing that the proposed federal constitution would eventually allow for the intrusion of government into virtually every sphere and aspect of life. He even predicted that under the vastly expanded centralized power of the state the taxing powers of bureaucrats and other unelected officials would eventually confiscate as much as a quarter of the income of the citizens—a notion that seemed laughable at the time but that has proven to be ominously modest in light of our current governmental leviathan. St. Clair lived to see the hated English tyrants who destroyed his homeland defeated. But he despaired that his adopted home might actually create similar tyrannies and impose them upon themselves.

Cyrus Griffin (1736–1796) Like Peyton Randolph, he was trained in London's Inner Temple to be a lawyer—and thus was counted among his nation's legal elite. Like so many other Virginians, he was an anti-federalist, though he eventually accepted the new Constitution with the promise of the Bill of Rights as a hedge against the establishment of an American monarchy—which still had a good deal of currency. The Articles of Confederation afforded such freedoms that he had become convinced that even with the incumbent loss of liberty, some new form of government would be required. A protégé of George Washington—having worked with him on several speculative land deals in the West—he was a reluctant supporter of the constitutional ratifying process. It was during his term in the office of the presidency—the last before the new national compact went into effect–that ratification was formalized and finalized. He served as the nation's chief executive from January 22, 1788 until George Washington's inauguration on April 30, 1789.

title: US History/New Nation


text:
Spanish/Exercises/Articles

^Lesson 2^

Fill in the blank
Por favor, rellena los espacios en blanco con el articulo correcto: Please, fill in the blank with the correct article:

1. ____ mesa (a table)

2. ____ caballos (some horses)

3. ____ gato (the cat)

4. ____ ciudad (the city)

5. ____ casas (some houses)

6. ____ hijos (the sons)

7. ____ hijas (the daughters)

8. ____ perro (a dog)

Soluciones a los ejercicios Solutions to exercices

^Lesson 2^

title: Spanish/Exercises/Articles


text:
Spanish/Exercises/Telling Time

^Lesson 2^

Translate the following into Spanish

 * 1) It's quarter past one.
 * 2) It's two o'clock.
 * 3) It's twenty minutes after five.
 * 4) It's midnight.
 * 5) It's six o'clock.
 * 6) It's half past ten.
 * 7) It's five minutes to eleven.
 * 8) It's ten minutes to noon.

Soluciones a los ejercicios Solutions to exercices

^Lesson 2^

title: Spanish/Exercises/Telling Time


text:
GCSE Science/Three useful components

GCSE Science/Electricity

This page looks at three components that are used in electrical circuits. The three components in question are: The diode, the thermistor, and the light dependent resistor. You will see how the components work and how they are used.

The Diode
A diode is a device that allows current to flow in one direction but not in the reverse direction. Its circuit symbol consists of a triangle pointing in the direction that current is allowed to flow with a line at the point, inside a circle. Diodes are useful for stopping current flowing in the "wrong" direction.

Above is a current voltage graph for a typical diode. Note that the diode needs a small voltage (about 0.6V) to work. Below 0.6V in the forward direction very little current flows. At or above 0.6V the resistance drops dramatically and a huge current can flow. In the reverse direction, virtually no current flows no matter how large the voltage is. (Eventually, when the voltage gets high enough, the diode "breaks down" and current is able to flow in the reverse direction. For normal diodes however this "break down voltage" is very high and can be ignored.  A diode that is connected in reverse to use the break down effect is called a Zener diode.  It is used to provide voltage control in power supplies (called the Zener voltage).)

Diodes are useful for turning AC current into DC current (AC/DC converters are called rectifiers). In AC the electricity flows back and forth in cycles. Mains electricity is AC. It cycles 50 times every second. This is fine for something like a lightbulb, where the bulb does not care in which direction the electricity flows. Some devices however can only work off DC. A toy electric train for example would not go with AC. The current would be saying "go forwards", "go backwards" over and over again 50 times a second! With a diode in the circuit the negative part of the cycle is stopped.

The graph on the left shows AC current. Note that the current cycles positive, negative, positive, and so on. The electricity is flowing to and fro. Putting the current through a diode has the result seen on the right. The positive part of the cycle in unaffected, but the negative is wiped out. The current goes positive, zero, positive.

The Thermistor

A thermistor is a just a resistor whose resistance depends on temperature. Most thermistors have lower resistance when the temperature is high. They are used in circuits which are temperature dependent. For example, fire alarms, the temperature gets too high; the alarm sounds.

The LDR
A light dependent resistor is a resistor whose resistance depends on the amount of light shining on it. Its resistance gets less the more light shines on it. It can be used in circuits that are light dependent. For example, switching circuits for street lights. The ambient light gets too low; the lamp turns on. It is also known as a photoresistor from photo, the Latin for light.

Questions
Safety in Mains circuits>>

title: GCSE Science/Three useful components