Axiomatic Account of Scientific Theories Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Axiomatic Account of Scientific Theories - Essay Example As the study outlines logical axioms refer to an argument or reasoning which is taken to be true within the system of the logic they define. On the other hand, non-logical axioms are actually defining properties for the domain or of the domain of a certain mathematical theory. For instance, a non logical axiom can be presented mathematically as: x+y = y+x. In this case, the axiom can be used to imply assumptions, or a postulate. Therefore, to make a system of knowledge or a domain of knowledge an axiom is to show that its claims can be deduced from the axiom(s). From this paper it is clear thst hypothetical deductive model claims that these method requires a hypothesis to be made first. That is, a prediction is made with the expectation of its opposite to be the expected results. It is thus referred to as a falsification process since the hypotheses has to be proved not to be true but if it is done so, by the research to be true, then they are said to be collaborated by their predictions. In relation to the axiomatic account, this theory has its premise or the backdrop of reasoning in its hypothesis. More so, the hypothesis in the Hypothesis-Deductive theory is the basis of reasoning as compared to axiomatic account where the axiom is the premise for reasoning. What would be considered the best argument for scientific realism is the idea that scientific knowledge and ideas are progressive rather than retrogressive in nature. Therefore it is able to make predictions about an idea or an issue in question much successful. This element of scien tific realism makes it very much reliable as it is very clear to be followed since one aspect whether observable or unobservable leads to the other in a logical manner.

Conflict Between US And USSR History Essay

Conflict Between US And USSR History Essay In the stressful conflict that accrued between the United States and the U.S.S.R. Was after the Second World War with Hitler. The United States and the Soviet Union In 1945 became the two leading super powers in Europe, with the USSR predominately occupying the countries of Eastern Europe. The United States was the peace keeper of the countries of Western Europe. These two superpowers, in Germany along with France and Britain, agreed on occupied areas of land which made up a framework for four-power control over Europes land mass. In the February meetings at Yalta, in July/August at Potsdam in 1945 the two superpowers and Britain negotiated to divide the states for a land territory settlement of Europe. When the Potsdam conference became serious many differences were fought over about the future evolving status of Germany and the rest of the states of Europe. Each meeting the super powers discussed the Far East They paid very close attention to the admittance of the USSR into the war against Japan. By 1947 an east-west division of states was manifesting its head with the Soviets seriously intending on undermining democracy and establishing puppet communist regimes in Eastern Europe. In Germany the Soviets were bent on crippling their economy and creating an overwhelming influence in their territory that they wanted to occupy. The Soviets defended their desires of Europe in terms of creating anti-Fascist governments which were friendly towards the USSR and her beliefs. The USSR was portraying the United States as bent on destroying communism while the United States portrayed the USSR as determined to undermining liberal democracy in the United States as well as Europe. The Cold War was marked by the Berlin Blockade Crisis of 1948-9. As time progressed the victory of Maos Red Army of the American sponsored Nationalist Government in China in 1949 and the Korean War in 1950, received pressure from the Soviet military occupation of Hungary in 1956. From Berlin on to 1958 leading up to the Wall crisis of 1961 in Berlin, Germany and the Missile Crisis in Cuba in 1962. During this time the Americans pulled their resources together and their new role as leader of the West was offering assistance to the economies of the Western European states they occupied through the implemented Marshall Plan of 1947. Recently allied to an emerging alliance of Western European states America signed the North Atlantic Treaty of 1949; taking the lead in controlling the Federal Republic of Germany from the three Western zones that were occupied in 1949. In the early 1950s America worked for rearming of these new states and its full membership in North Atlantic Treaty Organization during the year 1955. The USSR proclaimed its territories in Germany as the German Democratic Republic completely created a formal alliance with its Eastern European new friends in 1955 which created the Warsaw Pact Treaty Organization. The Americans concluded an alliance in Asia making a peace treaty with Japan in 1951 and 1952 and included other states such as Australia, New Zealand, Thailand, and the Philippines, within a series of alliances, while the USSR finished an alliance with China in 1950. but the Americans gradually became entangled in a more complex war in Vietnam while the war in Korea ended in 1953 in which it supported the South Vietnam against North Vietnam which the north was backed by the USSR and China. Throughout this era the two countries made policies of rearming of nuclear weapons with continued developed of long-range weapons where they could destroy each other from their own countries. The Cuban Missile Crisis relations got much better after the agreements were finished in stabilizing the situations in Europe. The Quadripartite Agreement from Berlin in 1971 led to the two German states entering the United Nations in 1973. The Helsinki Accords agreed the Co-operation in Europe in 1975 which appeared to mark a tacit peace treaty to end the Cold War and World War II by the Conference on Security. Agreements that limited the nuclear arms race were also finished. The conflict between the superpowers kept on going even through this era of this easing, as of tension between competitors. Even in new areas of rivalry such as was in Africa crossed its Continent while the betterment of relations continued between China and, the United States with the added work of President Nixon, the Secretary of State Kissinger, and Premier Chou En-Lai. Together they eased the tensions between the United States and the USSR worsening the relations between her and China. This gave a new shap e to negotiations towards peace between the two superpowers in the 1970s. By the mid-1970s the Cold War in its original form can be said to have died away. The arms race between East and West had all the characteristics of a classic action-reaction model of international conflict in which each side reacts to an earlier step by the other side. The explanation of the origins of the conflict is more complex, though three broad categories of explanation can be identified. First, some analysts have emphasized that the Cold War occurred primarily as a result of the destruction of German power, the resulting power vacuum in Central Europe and the new bipolar balance of power between the superpowers. From this perspective, the Cold War was a traditional great power conflict in which ideological rivalry was essentially secondary and the structural constraints of bipolarity crucial in throwing the two sides apart. A second explanation, sometimes called the orthodox or liberal interpretation, stresses the American desire for a return to a much more limited internatio nal role after the Second World War. However, after having begun to disarm and disengage from Europe, the Americans were obliged by Soviet expansionism in Eastern Europe to take up in 1947 a much more active, and unsought for, role in Europe in order to contain Soviet power. A third explanation stresses the long-term objective of the American capitalist power to undermine communism and to expand American power throughout the Middle East, the Far East, and all of Europe. Some writers in this category thus trace the Cold War back to American opposition to the 1917 Russian Revolution. Of course, many accounts weave together two or even all three of these broad categories. In the 1980s there was a short-lived but intensive reawakening of the Cold War, sometimes called the New Cold War. DÃ ©tente petered out in the late 1970s, arms control faltered, and in December 1979 the Soviet Union occupied Afghanistan. From the year 1980 onward the USSR exerted intense pressure over the government of Poland. In the United States Reagan denounced the Soviet Union in ideological terms and in Britain Thatcher denounced the Soviet Union in ideological terms which was unheard of since the worst days of the Cold War. On the Western side there was rearmament in Europe, under the so-called double-track policy of NATO, changes in the American doctrine of deterrence which appeared to emphasize the political utility of limited nuclear war, and the American pursuit of defenses against Soviet missiles in the Strategic Defense Initiative. In the post-year 1945 era it was difficult to disentangle action and reaction between the two sides. In any case, by 1987 the two superpower s had moved decisively back towards a better agreement on treaties by 1989 while Soviet power itself had crumbled. The US and Russian agreements needed to work together against terrorism after September 11, 2001 which marked the most dramatic change in their relations since the start of the Cold War in 1948. The imploded views of the socialists in Europe in 1989 started this new European order. Germany was brought back together, healing the pain and suffering along Europes heart and soul. This time in history that has been described as the Cold War, needed to be ended. Soviet spokesperson Gennadi Gerasimov stated, this era of conflict had last from Yalta to Malta, a reference to the time between the famous 1945 summit and a brief conference with the U.S. President George Bush including Gorbachev off the coast of the neutral island of Malta in December 1989. Latter at a summit, Gorbachev announced the end of an era and the start of a new one, a lasting and peaceful one, promising that he would never start a hot war against the United States. Bush said, that he looked forward to enduring cooperation. The real end to the period would come two years later, when the Soviet Union ceased to exist. (Freedman, L. 2010)

Free College Admissions Essays: A Good Role Model :: College Admissions Essays

A Good Role Model It is easy to answer some hard questions such as what does DNA (Deoxyribonucleic acid) stand for. One who studies in microbiology gets that answer in one second. For some easy questions, where does your character and personality come from? it is hard to answer such easy questions. One needs more time to get the answer. Psychologists may be concerned about one's childhood period and family environment. The character and personality is under the control of inherited genes but also is influenced by the environment. It is generally believed that the influence came from a family member during the childhood period and would spread to adulthood. To make a good character and personality for children, a family member needs to be a good role model. The essay "An American Childhood" by Annie Dillard is a good example of how a family member has influence on the children. This essay expresses her idea about her mother when the author looks back at her young age. Children will copy his or her character from the nearest person around them and develop this process until they mature. Family members would be the biggest influence to young children. A young girl imitates her mother and a young boy imitates his father, respectively. From the essay, Dillard said a lot about her mother's character and emotion in many points. Her mother is a strong and independent woman. The author says, "She was an unstoppable force; she never let go"(210). She means that her mother has strong energy to get something done and she never stops until it is accomplished. Her mother's character might differ from other ordinary women at the same time in the early 1960's. Her mother develops the seed of character and personality, which is the great impact and inf luence on her. For example, her mother questioned her about her assumption that Eisenhower would win the election. "How do you know?"(210) her mother questioned her. She said that everyone says that Eisenhower would win. Her mother asked "Did you ask everyone?"(210); She would definitely say that her mother was a straightforward person who questioned every detail in conversations. She had more and more unusual characteristics such as she persuaded the U.S. Post Office to let her keep her old address forever. The author may have learned not to be critical, but also taught her daughter to be independent and strong.

Impact of Priorities on the Intersection of Language and Culture

Carolina Granados Mrs. Brady AP Language and Literature 16 September 2012 Impact of Priorities on the Intersection of Language and Culture The impact of language on culture and culture on language are all essentially based on priorities. A priority can be described as a resource or activity that a culture gives specified attention to. Distinguishing the priorities of a culture can be easily done by taking a look at their language or at their culture. The priorities of cultures, such as that of the Normans, Eskimos, Italians or Asians, are food, everyday activities, and communicating.There are many types of priorities but one priority that is probably the most important to any culture is food. According to Bill Bryson in The Mother Tongue, â€Å"every language has areas in which it needs, for practical purposes, to be more expressive than others† (14). This means that the culture’s priorities cause the language to be more expressive. For example, Italians have over 500 n ames for macaroni because pasta is their main priority, while Araucanian Indians of Chile have a variety of words for hunger because food is scarce thus not a top priority.As reported by Tanya Brady in her lecture, in 1066 A. D the Normans and the Anglo Saxons had different words for the food they ate. The Anglo Saxon’s priority was the farm animals and to provide the French with food and so they named their food with words like sheep, cow and pig. On the other hand the Norman’s priority was not the farm animal but the actual food on their table therefore they named their food with words like mutton, beef, and bacon. This matters because it shows that their priorities of their food are seen throughout the words in their language.In 1984, Winston was unfamiliar with â€Å"good† foods, like wine. In the book O’Brien says, â€Å"It’s called wine† (Orwell 171). This means that Winston did not know what it was called because it was not in his lan guage sine wine was something Winston never had, making it not a priority. Food is a simple priority that can be affected by the words we use to describe it. In The Origins of Pleasure, Paul Bloom argues that changing the word that describes the food can change what a person thinks they are eating thus bringing more pleasure. For example, changing the name of wines for a more luxurious and expensive name an cause adults to believe they are drinking the expensive stuff making the wine more enjoyable. This shows that the words that are chosen to describe something can affect priorities, like the adults with the wine. Priorities of any culture, like the Eskimos, circle around the everyday activities they do. According to Bill Bryson, Eskimos have fifty words for types of snow. This means that the snow is a large part of their life, making it a big part of their language. Bryson also states that Arabs have over 6,000 words for camels and camel equipment.Working with camels is an everyda y thing for the Arabs making camels a priority to their culture. Brady makes it clear that the Normans focused everyday on matters of court, government, fashion, and high living, while the English peasants just continued to eat, drink, work and sleep. The difference in preferences of these two tiers, the French-speaking autocracy and the English-speaking peasantry, is seen throughout the words in their language. In 1984 George Orwell describes that Winston’s priority was to work for the Inner Party.His everyday life did not consist of fun and interesting activities but consisted instead on things the Party wanted him to do. This was because his leader Big Brother was destroying words out of their vocabulary which limited what Winston and the rest of the people in Oceania could do. Orwell describes Winton’s day by saying, â€Å"He†¦hurried of to the Center, took part in the solemn foolery of a â€Å"discussion group,† played two games of table tennis†¦ and sat for a half an hour through a lecture†¦ † (109). This shows his activities were controlled and limited.Mark Pagel in How Language Transformed Humanity said, â€Å"You use your language to alter the settings inside someone else’s brain to suit your interest,† and in fact that was what Big Brother was doing to them. Limiting a person’s activities also limits their priorities. Malcolm Gladwell, in Outliers, states that Asian children tend to work harder in mathematics because it is an advantage in their culture. Their language constructed of remarkably brief number words, which allowed the children to memorize them faster. The difference means that Asian children learn to count much faster than American children.This difference matters because the advantage of the number words in their language made mathematics one of their culture’s priorities. Communication is another priority of any culture around the world. Davis Sedaris in Americans i n Paris portrays the priority of communication perfectly. Davis Sedaris could not communicate with the people in Paris because of his language, which narrowed down who he was able to talk to and what he was able to do. Sedaris’s activities were around the people that made him happy and that he had ease understanding and communicating like the children at the theater.Sedaris’s priority of communicating with others was affected by the language he had not yet mastered. Malcolm Gladwell observed that the kinds of errors that cause plane crashes are invariably errors of communication. In the Avianca crash Klotz, the pilot, was not able to communicate his problem effectively because he was using his own cultural language, speaking as a subordinate would to a superior. To the Kennedy Airport air traffic controllers the mitigated speech from the pilot did not mean he was being deferential to a superior but instead it meant he didn’t have a problem.According to George Or well the Inner Party used Euphony to prevent people in Oceania to communicate. The purpose was so that their society would speak so easily, almost automatically, with no personal expression so that communicating would become harder. Stripping away the uniqueness of how the word was said made the ideas left behind not worth listening to, thus decreasing the communication between everyone. Orwell says, â€Å"There will be no love† (267). In Oceania the people did not have any individual relationships, or any bonds or any love because there was no communication.This means that the priority of communication with individuals, like friends and family was removed completely. This matters because again changing the language in any way can affect the priorities of any individual, like the priority of communication. Mark Pagel states, â€Å"Our modern world is communicating with its self and with each other. † This means that communication is a way for every culture to transfer goods, ideas and technologies. This is a way for parts of the world to put their priorities together changing the known language and culture.Priorities are a large factor of the intersection between language and culture. Priorities essentially distinguish the difference in cultures by pin pointing the focuses in every single culture. Priorities of cultures, such as the food they eat, the activities they conduct, and the way they communicate, affect what people correlate to the words they speak which in turn changes the language. Works Cited Brady, Tanya. â€Å"The History of English Language. † A. P. English Language and Composition. Tahquitz High School. Titan Trail, Hemet, CA. 22 August 2012. Lecture Bryson, Bill.The Mother Tongue: The English Language. Great Britain: Penguin Books,1990. Print. Gladwell, Malcolm. Outliers: The Story of Success. New Work: Little, Brown and Company, November 2008 Orwell, George. 1984. New York: Penguin Books, 1949. Print Page, Mark. â€Å"Ho w Language Transformed Humanity. † 2011 August. http://www. ted. com/talks/view/lang/en//id/1203 Sedaris, David. â€Å"165: Americans in Paris. † Interview with David Sedaris. By Mike, Daisey. Chicago, 2012. Web Bloom, Paul. â€Å"The Origins of Pleasure. † TED Global. Edinburgh, Scotland. July 2011. Conference Presentation.

How the area of a wire affects the resistance in a circuit Essay

Electricity is conducted through a conductor. Resistance is the word used to describe the opposition between forces. The more free electrons there are, the better the conduction and the worse the resistance is. The more atoms vibrate, the more resistance there is. The free electrons are given energy, as a result they move and collide with the surrounding electrons. This happen throughout the whole wire. This is how the electricity is conducted. Resistance is the result of energy loss in form of heat. How do we measure it? V=I/R V=Voltage I =Current R=Resistance Ohm’s Law. This law states that the current through a metallic conductor (wire) at a constant temperature is proportional to the potential difference (Voltage). Therefore the Voltage and Current is constant. If the resistance increases the temperature increases, so it stays constant. At higher temperatures the particles move more quickly, increasing the collision of the free electrons. Possible Input Variables Wire area Wire thickness Wire length Applied voltage Material Taught connections Cross-sectional shape Insulated Density of wire Coiled or not Temperature Preliminary Experiments. Easy to measure? Easy to change Wire area V V Wire thickness X X Wire length V V Applied voltage V V Material X V Taught connections X X Cross-sectional shape X X Insulated X V Density of wire V X Coiled or not V V Temperature V V Applied I or V by a double cell which is measured by digital volt and ammeter. I will find out the Resistance by the formula using R=V/I. Wire area. It is difficult to change the area. A possible solution would be to add wires and twist them together. Coiled or not? It has not got an obvious affect. The Voltage and Current didn’t increase or decrease. Temperature. My idea was to set up a water bath to keep the wire at a same temperature at every point. I would experiment with temperatures from 20? C-100 (room temperature to the boiling point of water) Wire length. Is very easy to set up. There is a very large range of results. Chosen Input variable I chose wire area as my variable because it is has a better variety of results. I will have 8 wires with the same cross sectional area. It would be to expensive using different cross sectional sizes of wire. I will put the wire parallel to each other an twist them add the end to increase the area of the wire. My chosen output variable is resistance because that is what I am looking for in the wire. Fair Test In the experiment I am not going to change anything ( wire length and applied voltage). The only thing I will change is the area of the wire (input variable). I will use the same equipment throughout the test, to make sure it is a fair test. If I would use different equipment it may give me different readings. I am using a safety resistor, so that the current is the same and that the wire will not overheat. It would not be a fair test if the wire would heat because it would give my different sets of results at different temperatures. It could also be a safety hazard if the wire overheats. Method Cut eight wires of the same cross sectional area in 35cm length (only 30cm of wire measured because I have to attach crocodile clips on each side   The equipment is as following: 2 cell Battery Ammeter+ Voltmeter Safety Resistor 8 wires (35cm) 2 crocodile clips   My circuit will look as following:   Let electricity pass through the circuit and note down the readings of the ammeter and voltmeter. Add more wires to the circuit and continue as planned   Make three sets of results through an accurate experiment Prediction I will expect that if the area of the wire increases the resistance will decrease. This can be proven by background physics of the past. Observation Test Results Nr. of wires   This graph shows the voltages I measured Nr. of wires This graph shows the Current I measured Nr. of wires R1 R2 R3 Rave Area m^2 1/Area   This graph shows me the resistance and resistance average I have worked out. It also includes the formulas for the Area and 1/Area My Graphs are on a separate sheet of graph paper. Analysis My graph shows me that if I increase the area the resistance decreases. I have plotted two graphs to give me a wider range of results and averages in different areas (1/Area and Area m^2). My Area graph looks like a y =1/X graph X Y 1 1 2 0. 5 3 0. 333 4 0. 25 To reassure this I have plotted an average 1/Area. If it is correct then I should get a straight line. When I plotted the graph I had a straight line. This tells me that the average is proportional to 1/Area i. e. Rave ? 1/Area. The slope is: y/x= 10. 5/16= 0. 66 ? /mi I am ignoring the offset on my 1/Area graph This experiment shows me that resistance is definitely affected by the area of the wire. Looking at my background physics it has worked out like resistors on a parallel circuit. When attaching another wire to the experiment it acts like adding another parallel resistor in a parallel circuit. So if the area of the wire increases the resistance decreases. Also I have learned if the voltage goes down the resistance goes up Evaluation I found this experiment easy to do. I had no anomalies on my graph. This means that the points I have plotted are all in a acceptable arrangement. There were no experimental caused by a faulty connection. There were no safety hazards and the experiment was safe to do.