Microbial Fuel Cells (Design Study) Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words - 1

Microbial Fuel Cells (Design Study) - Essay Example We are, today, faced with an extraordinary situation in which the world population has reached a stage where the conventional sources of energy like fossil fuels have been depleted so much that there is little hope for the coming generations to be able to harness any of it. Therefore, there is an urgent need to discover sustainable sources of energy that will not only help in reducing the carbon footprint but can also be replicated in the developing nations. A literature review on such alternative sources of energy revealed that microbial fuel cells, which employ microorganisms to biodegrade pollutants from the environment to generate electricity, are a novel method of reclaiming natural resources along with providing a new means of generating energy. This design study will be an effort towards determining the cost-efficiency of traditional MFCs versus a simple, single chambered MFC comprising of cheaper components. The purpose of the experiment will be to popularize the inexpensive MFCs and show if scaled up, they can present a low-price energy source, which will at the same time be used for bioremediation of water resources polluted by effluents. Microbial fuel cells work on the principle that some microorganisms called electricigens produce electricity while metabolizing wastewater for their sustenance. The MFC consists of a semi-permeable membrane or cation exchange membrane that allows ions to pass through them but not the microbes; two electrodes, usually the cathode is made up of platinum and the anode is carbon graphite or carbon cloth. It is fitted by a wire to complete the external circuit (Microbal Fuel Cell, 2008). Wastewater is made to flow through the anaerobic compartment and the bacterial metabolic action on the wastewater allows electrons to become free and the cell starts conducting electricity. To compare the electricity outputs

Civic Punishment or Private Revenge Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Civic Punishment or Private Revenge - Case Study Example A presentation of the fragmented accusations of Euphiletus' accusers will be offered in order to clarify some of the rhetorical strategies that Euphiletus' utilizes in his defense speech. Finally, some concluding remarks on how adultery, crimes of passion and homicide were understood then and now. There is some evidence to suggest that the ethical internals of Euphiletus' defense were intended to generate sympathy among the judges (Herman 407). By presenting himself as deceived husband and victim, Euphiletus is attempting minimally to provide an emotional basis for his desire to kill Eratosthenes. This is important for if Euphiletus wanted to portray himself as an Athenian gentleman whose moral composition represented the mainstream of Hellenistic society, then his act represents the logical consequence of a man whose wife has been caught in flagrante delicto with another man. If it was the case that such an act could not have been conscionable under such conditions then the Euphiletus' strategy would be counterproductive as his demeanor would be interpreted as the manifestation of a morally eccentric minority. However, it is not to suggest that Euphiletus wished to portray himself as a jealous husband fueled with righteous and murderous rage. Rather, at every step as will be shown later he presents himself a mediated actor of the law, merely the hand of the law rather than its head or heart. In fact, he wishes to show that Eratosthenes was not murdered but executed by him and was only done so by him on mere coincidence that it was his wife with whom Eratosthenes had slept (Harris 365). Thus, Euphiletus wishes to draw out the tensions inherent in two antithetical codes of conduct: 1) an older, de-centralized, tribal one in which honor and vengeance played integral roles and 2) a more evolved centralized code of conduct in which democratically endorsed values were mutually agreed upon and enforced communally (Herman 408). By engendering a feeling of vengeance while simultaneously negating its causative role in this act, Euphiletus paradoxical strategy gives a path in which the Athenian judges can acquit Euphiletus on the grounds that the act was one of civic punishment while concomitantly acknowledging the obvious vengeful passions that were aroused duri ng the incident itself. He begins by laying out the task before him, which is to convince the jury that Eratosthenes' killing was prompted by the debauchery of his wife via seduction and the disgrace tendered therein and for no other reason, " that this was the one and only enmity between him and me; that I have not acted thus for the sake of money" (Lamb 1.4). It is important that money or other enmity do not prefigure in any manner for Euphiletus' case, as that would have invalidated the laws for which the type of justified homicide he wished to claim happened. If indeed money or other enmity figured in this case, as his accusers had apparently tried to impute, it would simply be premeditated murder in

George Berkeley And Empiricism Analysis Philosophy Essay

George Berkeley And Empiricism Analysis Philosophy Essay Empiricism is the doctrine that knowledge derives from experience. One very important philosopher to empiricism is George Berkeley. Berkeley denies the existence of material substances and says that existence of substances is depended on perception. In his famous Three Dialogues, he introduces characters Philonous and Hylas whose names ironically mean love of intellect and matter. As the First Dialogue starts, Hylas calls Philonous a skeptic by his definition one who doubts of everything or who denies the realty and truth of things (pg.219, The Empiricist) he soon gets Hylas to admit that he too is a skeptic. Philonous breaks everything down into two groups either having: primary qualities (qualities that can be measured) and secondary qualities (sensible qualities). In the following pages Berkeley goes on to prove that there is no inherit qualities within a material substance that makes it a material substance, and everything is viewed through perception. For example, a cherry is a cherry because it is red, sweet, round etc. But all those things are not innate things that are a cherry. They are sensible qualities because we see, taste, and feel that the cherry is red, sweet and round. Even though we all agree that before us is a cherry, we all will find that we have different perception about whether on not the cherry is sweet or bitter. Anything that is arbitrary is perception. His point was that if it is without being perceived, then it cannot be proven. In order to know a thing exists, we must perceive them. Berkeley also set out to prove that primary qualities only exist in our minds. His proof of this is that an object perceived by two different people could be larger or smaller, depending on how big that person actually is. For example a foot to me may seem moderately long, but a foot to a 6 foot person may seem really short. Hence, extension is not inherent in the object. He also gives the example of motion and how speed is measured by an internal clock In the Second Dialogue, Berkeley introduces Monism (everything is reduced to one), Dualism: 1) thinking (substance pilot) 2) physical material (substance machine), and Idealism (only perceiving minds and perceptions exist). This is where Philonous brings God into the equation because he needs a cause for our sensible ideas. His argument of causation is as follows: 1) sensible ideas must be caused by some spirit 2) I am not the cause of my sensible ideas 3) There must be some other spirit that causes my sensible ideas. Therefore, there is a God. His argument of Perception then is: 1) sensible things cannot exist without being perceived 2) sensible things exist independently of my perceptions 3) there must be some other perceiver. Therefore God is the perceiver. He goes on to say that since were purely passive in our perceptions and God is purely active, it is God that excites ideas in our minds. In the Third Dialogue, Hylas asks how idealism can distinguish a dream from reality (since they are both depending on the mind). Philonous answers him by saying that dreams and products of the imagination are faint and dependent on the will; sense impressions are livelier and do not depend on the will. Hylas also brings up the fact that if God is the author of all things, he would also be the author of evil; Philonous says that evil doesnt exist outward, only inward and that we are in control of our own wills. At first I found Berkley very convincing in his arguments about perception, but as with other philosophers, when he gets to the existence of God, their argument falls apart. The thought of God exciting all our ideas through our souls is a bit strange. Yes all perceptions have to be first perceived by God, and that God had to have an idea of us doing something for it to actually happen is crazy. I dont agree with Berkeleys use of God, but I dont necessarily agree that God just created the world and people in it and steps away from it (Descartes, Meditations); there has to be some type of middle ground. If you fuse the philosophies of Descartes and Berkeley, I believe that one could come up with something more believable, its just too hard to believe that God does everything because in a sense your saying that God who is all powerful and omnipresent uses us to act here on Earth, which is absurd since we are finite and he is infinite. I didnt quite get Berkeleys concept that God is all active and first perceives us doing things before we do them because is flawed. If that were true, you would have to infer that God is also the author of evil. If God perceives everything we do before we do it and everything we do our first His ideas, then he would be able to stop evil doings. What Berkeley says about us being in control of our own wills would have to be false because if that were true, we would be in control of our own perceptions in my opinion. It just seems that if that were true, then everything we did would be in a sense godly, and that obviously isnt true. It makes perfect sense to me that are senses play a big role in how we view the world around us, but although he was convincing in that concept I, couldnt help but thinking that Hylas had a lot of good points also. There must be something innate in objects that make them the objects they are, or else we why would we need to name the objects to discern one from another? I thought that Berkely had a good theory, but it wasnt realistic, although convincing. If I cant agree with Berkeleys use of God, then his whole theory starts to starts to fall apart because hes using God as a sort of cushion for his concept, but I dont think he uses God in the right way. Because Berkely is a bishop, he cant be really objective when it comes to God. He already has preconceived thoughts, and for philosophy to work one needs to dispel all previous conceptions on all subject matter, but obviously he cant because of his vocation. This is where his argument on God is flawed. I believe that the reason why philosopher arguments get confusing or nonsensical when it comes to God is because I believe that back then religion was uniform. Taboo to go against it, whereas now we have many. Many religions open up many different ways of viewing God. I believe this is important when it comes to philosophy because philosophy is most broadly defined as love and pursuit of wisdom by intellectual means and moral self-discipline. You cant truly have self exploration without being willing to accept new things or at least the possibility of new things. In conclusion, I could not agree with Berkeleys idealisms, but they did make me think about they way I view the world. At the end of the day, I feel that personal biases will always get in the way of the way we perceive.

Menace II Society and Colonization :: essays research papers

â€Å"A crooked childhood it's what the way I am, It's got me in the state where I don't give a damn, Somebody helped me but now they don't hear me, I guess I be another victim of the ghetto So I guess I gotta do what so I ain't finished I grew up to be a streiht up menace, geah.† -â€Å"Streiht Up Menace† by MC Eiht   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  The song lyrics above are from the soundtrack of the film Menace II Society and correspond directly to the hardships that people are given when growing up in the ghetto and when surrounded by a life of violence. Because they know nothing other than this aggressive and brutal way of life, they continue this violent cycle and rarely break away to begin a new way of life. Twin brothers Albert and Allen Hughes direct the film. The Hughes began making movies at age 12, but their formal film education began their freshman year of high school when Allen took a TV production class. They soon made a short film entitled How To Be A Burglar and people began to take notice. Their next work, Uncensored Videos, was broadcast on cable, introducing them to a wider audience. After high school, Albert began taking classes at the Los Angeles Community College Film School. Two short films established the twins’ reputation as innovative filmmakers and allowed them to direct Menace II Society (1993), which made its world premiere at the Cannes Film Festival and grossed nearly 10 times as much as its $3 million budget. After following up with Dead Presidents (1995) they directed the feature-length documentary American Pimp (1999). From the very first scene, detailing Caine and O-Dog's fatal armed robbery of a Korean market, violence is cruelly graphic. â€Å"In this instance, the film succeeds in painting a disturbing picture of violence, one in which the characters' lack of remorse, rather than stylistic convention, shapes and colors the horror of the image.† Although most of the violence is filmed realistically and unfolds in real time, the Hughes can't seem to resist stylizing some of the more important narrative events. Thus, while the robbery introduces violence, O-Dog's shooting of the Korean market owner is shown directly only further into the story, when black and white images of the store's stolen surveillance video are played and replayed for the entertainment of Caine, O-Dog, and their friends. While an innovative means of conveying action, the video becomes nothing more than a diversion.

Demo: Wrap a Present

Demo Speech: How to Wrap a Present Introduction I. Open with Impact: At some point in your life you have probably either received or given a gift that looked something like this. (Hold up poorly wrapped gift. ) Nobody wants to be that person at the party with the gift that gets mistaken for trash. When giving a gift to someone it is important to put just as much thought into the gift wrapping as the gift buying. II. Connect with Audience: You may be thinking, but I don’t always have time to make my gift look professionally wrapped. Or, I don’t have the money to go out and buy the supplies I need to wrap a gift.III. Establish Impact: I am guilty of giving the ugliest gift at the party before and I know how it feels. Thankfully, I have changed my ways and learned that gift wrapping is not as intimidating as it seems. IV. Thesis: With just a little extra effort, your gift can be something you are proud to present. V. Preview Main Points: Today, I am going to show you how t o find inexpensive wrapping materials, properly wrap your gift with ease, and complete the look with some finishing touches. Transition: Now before we start, we are going to need some basic materials. Body I. Picking out the paper A.We want to be as cost effective as possible, but we still need enough materials to wrap for all those random family members and friends. 1. The most inexpensive paper can be found at your local discount store. 2. Go to your local dollar tree and pick out your favorite print or solid color wrapping paper. B. Other useful materials 1. You will want to pick out a spool of ribbon for the finishing touch. 2. You are also going to need scissors and clear tape. Transition: Now that we have all of our materials together, let’s get to wrapping. II. Wrapping the present A. Measure your paper 1. Place the gift in the unrolled paper. . Bring the paper up around the gift until you have enough paper to cover the gift. 3. Cut the paper so that you have about an inch of wrapping paper overlapping. 4. Move the box to the edge of the paper so that both sides will reach about halfway up the sides. Repeat this on the other side of the box as well then cut off any excess paper. B. Time to tape 1. Wrap the paper around the box until the paper overlaps and secure with the clear tape. 2. Make sure the box is centered inside the paper then fold the sides until the paper overlaps. Tape the flaps using the clear tape. C. Finishing Touches 1.Measure your ribbon by wrapping it around the present and leaving about 6 inches in excess and cut it. 2. Hold the middle of the ribbon at the top of the gift and wrap the ends around the bottom of the present. 3. Bring the ends through the loop and tie your best bow! 4. Turn the gift over and tape the ribbon to avoid it slipping out of place while being moved around. Transition: Once your gift is perfectly wrapped, you can also add other personal touches such as a decorative name tag or extra ribbon. Conclusion I. I hope that I have shown you that wrapping a gift does not have to be intimidating.There are many inexpensive ways to wrap your gifts and add unique touches. With just a little practice, you can soon become a gift wrapping pro. Don’t be that person with the trash bag gift. Impress everyone with your new gift wrapping skills! Works Cited Banner, Chrissa. How to Perfectly Wrap a Present. 2008. Web. 9 Nov 2012. http://crafts. slides. kaboose. com/105-how-to-perfectly-wrap-a-present/2 Alissa, . â€Å"Christmas Wrappings. †Ã‚  33 Shades of Green. Pinterest, 16 2009. Web. Web. 9 Nov. 2012. .

Why People Commit a Crime?

It was often asked and researched throughout the years of why people commit a crime. As the opposed question came about, theorist came out with their theories of why people commit a crime. I believe people commit crime because they are learning it from the influences in their life and because the person or persons is a very important aspect in their lives it leads to the process of why people commit a crime. This connects to Sutherland's theory of Differential Association, but while it does connect to Sutherland's theory this paper will focus on the social learning theory that Aker mentions and has further research of the subject of crime. Micro-Level Learning theory has been advanced by many theorist over the years such as the theorist Sutherland. If I were to test the theory of social learning, specifically micro-level learning theory I would examine the relationships with peers preferably intimate relationships with friends and family. Only then when viewing the intimate relationships, I would see the person learn the techniques of committing crime and what's considered in the text â€Å"definitions†. When mentioning â€Å"definitions† it's what is favorable and unfavorable toward violation of the law. Now, for the theory to be accurate I have to find things that support or amongst the search if it undermines the theory at hand. The theory had one major concern that undermines the accuracy of the theory. The theory does not give a good description of the favorable and unfavorable to crime. It was because that the description of the theory was first described by Sutherland than a few others, until it lead to Akers. There has been many theorists who tried to define the definitions more precisely. It was treated as different theories, but the main one I want to focus on is the social learning theory. Since there has been many theorist who focused for example, control theory it became difficult to find the theory that is more acceptable. Another concern that was mentioned was that the theory failed to describe the process of how crime is learned. Akers did however, did draw from psychology to get a better aspect of the behavior and the social learning process. The process comes in three steps as said by Akers. First, an individual learn beliefs that define crime as desirable or justifiable. He goes more in depth saying these beliefs lead to crime. The second process is that people engage in crime because are reinforced into that situation, meaning it could be peer pressure (a negative reinforcement) or the individual could receive a reward for participating in the crime. The last process is that people imitate the criminal behavior of others, which is the intimate relationship the individual has with them. The process of learning crime as shown through most studies which shows that associating with family and/or friends that exhibit criminal behavior, comes out more often throughout most of the studies. This was taken as a strong evidence to support the social learning theory, however, even though it had the correlation numerous researchers argued against it. The researchers argued that the correlation doesn't mean that the association with criminal family or friends cause criminal behavior in the individual. Even saying that as well there has been strong support to back up the social learning theory. It is said that the origin of the support stems from research solely based off of experiments being conducted such as surveys or field work studies. From all the information that has been researched and conducted has shown the support of the theory and also the facts that undermine the theory. If I were to make the theory more accurate I would say that an individual associating themselves with a delinquent family member influences the individual to commit or take part in criminal activities. This combined theory now becomes more accurate to the research that has been conducted by the theorists. The theory itself needs a lot more research that needs to be conducted, but with the improved version of the theory will lead to a more stronger support of the social learning theory.

In the trailer of Drag me to hell, the first scene in the trailer is of a freeway suggesting the film will be based around a lot of people and a busy environment Essays

In the trailer of Drag me to hell, the first scene in the trailer is of a freeway suggesting the film will be based around a lot of people and a busy environment Essays In the trailer of Drag me to hell, the first scene in the trailer is of a freeway suggesting the film will be based around a lot of people and a busy environment Essay In the trailer of Drag me to hell, the first scene in the trailer is of a freeway suggesting the film will be based around a lot of people and a busy environment Essay In the trailer of ‘drag me to hell’, the first scene in the trailer is of a freeway suggesting the film will be based around a lot of people and a busy environment; The first sight of our main character is a slim blond lady who is likely to be the subject of a victim typical to a horror film. She is driving a car portraying she is a working woman and independent. The next scene is of her and her manager having a conversation on a promotion position. The shoulder shot portrays her blouse which is not revealing, her attire comes against the male gaze theory which explains how media portrays women as vulnerable through their appearance. However this young lady holds a secure job in the city, she drives and dresses sensible. The main character does not following her heart into giving the woman the mortgage but instead declines her from it. This shows that her work has taken over her life as she seeks for promotion. As the scene changes, change in non-diegetic sound is heard. In the car park the main character is alone with just two cars. This implies she is very vulnerable in that situation in case she was to be in danger. The climax hits when the main character is being attached by the old lady in the previous scene. Close up is identified as the main character’s face is shown to be in horror by the old lady’s attack. The long shot is shown as the main character is being dragged out of her car by the old woman. This is also another connotation to why the title of the film could be â€Å"drag me to hell†. It is also unusual for a woman in horror movie to be the course of the killing and moreover to be an old lady with so much strength. Through this the audience can see that the old woman is supernatural in a sense or perhaps she has a demon within her. The conventions are twisted and subverted as the young lady who is meant to be naturally stronger then the much older woman is actually the victim and the weaker one. Furthermore the young lady is a total opposite to the old lady in the film. Diegetic sound is heard as the wind passes by almost slowing time when the old lady pulls a button from the main character’s coat holding it close to her face and the lighting hitting it as if it is a source of power. The low angle on the main character makes her seem inferior and vulnerable compared to the old lady. This shot fits in with the male gaze because even though the main character is independent in her life style and how she lives, she is still seen as weak and vulnerable physically. In the trailer near the ending there is a dialogue she has with a man telling her the demon will not leave her till â€Å"she burns in hell for eternity† this brings forward enigma code to whether she survives or not even though most horror film the blond girl dies.