Jamar Dynamometer Assignment Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 3250 words

Jamar Dynamometer - Assignment Example William A. Hammond MD sought after lifting up the condition of neurologists on top of that of universal practitioners, partially by the utilization of complicated tools like that of the handgrip dynamometer in addition to dynamograph. The community who invented these machines was time and again the individuals who utilized them, like that of the Dr. John Harvey Kellogg, Dr. William Hammond and Sir Francis Galton. There is limited information in relation to early on potency evaluation tools. a large number of the prehistoric writings have been mislaid throughout the wars in which the libraries have been damaged, like that of the library within Alexandria, which at its climax around 330 B.C. is alleged to have infatuated more than 700,000 papyrus rolls . The main objective of this assignment is to be able to create a document containing details regarding the assessment of grip strength using a Jamar Dynamometer as a standardized tool and Manual Muscle Strength as a non-standardized tool. Lately the American Society of Hand Therapists signified that a consistent arm positioning for hand strength tests, accomplished that the position of the upper limit may manipulate measurements, moreover suggested that the patient ought to be sitting with his shoulder objectively revolved, elbow bend at 90' plus the forearm with wrist in neutral position. While checking the capricious of wrist position, (RW, 1990) established no important variation in grip strength by test positions at 0' also 15' ulnar variation, 0' with 15' dorsiflexion, or else whichever grouping of these. The Jamar dynamometer had the maximum calibration accurateness of all the instruments checked. In most of the cases the arm ought to not be sustained by the inspector or else by a support. For grip strength determination, the dynamometer is placed vertically also in stripe with the forearm to preserve the typical forearm also wrist positions. For reliability, the handle of Jamar dynamometer is fixed at the seco nd handle position 3.8 cm for all the subjects. The protocol: To reduce the influences of the body position upon grip strength assessments, the normal protocol recommended by the American Society of Hand Therapists was utilized. With reference to them, a subject must be sitting within a straight backside chair with no arm rests amid the feet flat on the flooring, the shoulder within a neutral rotation as well as flexion. The elbow ought to be contracted to 900 by the forearm also wrist within neutral position. The protocol for the management of the dynamometer in the estimation of the grip strength together with the description of how to formulate the finest utilization of the calculated indexes, for experimental documentation functions together with

Music vs. Book Essay Example for Free

Music vs. Book Essay Books and music are not a direct comparison normally but when it comes to youngsters and their lives both have a very strong influence. When we are bored, it is the time we listen to music or read a book. These two are the common things we are doing in our leisure time. People should be influenced by music and book. Music can have both a positive as well as negative impact on an individual’s life. The nature and kind of music defines that what type of message they render on the youngster. While books of any type give you either eye opening or well meaning but misguided information on subjects ranging from the simplest subjects to the more sophisticated. Books can even be used by those who are looking for answers in life. Many people report finding the perfect book to answer the burning questions in their minds. Books are more limited: fiction like novels and short stories and non-fiction like memoir, history, biography, self help, and philosophy. Reading books require a larger share of our time. We cannot also do another thing while reading a book. We cannot read a book while washing clothes. Books are more intellectually stimulating and has bigger journey than music. On the contrary, music doesnt answer questions by itself. Music answers feeling or disturbed emotions looking for an outlet. It exists in an extraordinarily wide array of genres and styles like vocal music (song, choral music, and opera), solo instrumental, chamber, orchestral, band and etc. We will listen to the music we love countless times over the course of our lives. We can multitask while listening to music. We can listen to music while running or washing clothes. Music are more passion and emotional than books. Whether you want to listen to music or read a book, they can both give positive and negative influences, affect all kinds of age groups, and cause different views of the world.

Separates Science From All Other Human Activities Philosophy Essay

Separates Science From All Other Human Activities Philosophy Essay Science is distinguished for its changeable nature of conclusions. It addresses the method  used to reach conclusions; the ideas of verification, falsification, and the thought that science presents its theories with a degree of probability. The conclusions in science are conditional because currently they are considered to be true, but according to the nature of the science, they are subject to change. Science is defined as knowledge gained by systematic experimentation and analysis (Munday). What distinguishes the sciences from other areas is a very different method of finding truth. The definition of truth in this case is what works in practice or is useful to us because science is heavily based on the pragmatic theory (Munday). The question is perhaps misleading since it doesnt mention which type of science is implied; natural science, human science, or ethical science Science is a provisional human activity; this can be observed when comparing areas of knowledge in terms of pr ovisional conclusions. Science is a practice where truth is supported through experimentation and observations. It is a posteriori knowledge, meaning that it is knowledge that is derived from experience or empirical evidence. People state that science is based on too many assumptions, and the rules always change, therefore, we should employ other ways of knowing such as our perception. In my view, the main reason we should appreciate this way of knowing; the conclusions of science are changeable. These regular changes show that even though we might never find out the truth, we are progressing in subjects such as biology, physics, chemistry, etc. However, by expressing it as a pragmatic way of knowing, we can see that science is about discovering the truth. This truth may not be the perfect truth such as outlined by Plato with his idea of ideal forms. This truth is more concerned with value or usefulness. Within the history of science, scientific laws and theories have been changed or have been disproved. F or example, there was a cubical atom theory that stated that all atoms had a shape of a cube (Munday). This theory was disproved by many scientists such as Bohr and Rutherford (Munday). We now have a different prediction of what the atom is due to quantum mechanics (Munday). However, if you take account of Quantum Theory, then even the conclusions about the physical world become highly provisional reality is no longer deterministic and mechanistic, and some of our conclusions about this reality end up being provisional. Scientific knowledge is derived from the use of a precise, rigorous method that involves inductive logic. For example, if I observe that water always boils at 100 °C when I am cooking (Arnhart), I assume that this will always be the case (induction). However, if I were to boil water in Denver, Colorado, a location 1.6 km above sea level, I would discover that the water now boils at 94 °C, as the pressure on the liquid is reduced (Arnhart). As we can see, the ind uctive component of the scientific method can sometimes lead to an incorrect hypothesis. Even if a scientific theory has been rigorously tested one million times there is always the possibility that an exception will be found, and hence the theory falsified. Karl Popper acknowledged this problem and suggested that a hypothetical deductive method should be used, whereby false hypotheses are discarded through trials and disproof (Arnhart). This means we cannot prove a theory is correct; we can only prove that a hypothesis is false. Thus we can never know that a scientific theory is true; the reason why scientific conclusions are provisional. For instance, a scientist is trying to find a cure for cancer, but instead finds out how a persons brain works, he still expands our knowledge of all the things around us, even though that scientist was trying to find a different answer. This usefulness always reshapes our knowledge since it brings in new ideas and models that attempt to explain t he patterns that are all around us and where conclusions are made according to the current knowledge. Our knowledge is available to adapt by being provisional. With science, we accept our limitations of todays instruments, and we analyze the situation and what we can potentially do for further knowledge or experimentation. Science doesnt stop improving our customs of experimenting even though we know we cant reach the perfect truth (Plato) making it provisional even if it may seem to be currently true. Science is so relied upon for this reason that it advances our society. One of the main differences between the Natural and Human Sciences (ethics, history) is the object of study: while the Natural Sciences observe and experiment on the world of nature, the Human Sciences focus more on human behaviour. Humans are, arguably, less predictable and stable than the natural world, so the conclusions about our behaviour should be more provisional than the conclusions reached. Although science is the answer to many of our disputes, it is based mostly on theoretical predictions, and that creates a fallacy. For example, scientists in a university have made a device to clean and purify water for the people in South Africa and they have sent it to Africa (Arnhart). Once the device was in use, it killed 45% of the people in 3 weeks. A study relived that the filter used did stop Cysts (bacteria) from going through initially but these bacteria started to grow inside the filter clogging the filter. Nothing was noticed because the bacteria were so small, and the pressur e of the water squeezed the 4.5 micron bacteria into the 1 micron holes of the filter. In theory, filter was a valid device to use to clean the water but when in application is failed. These predictions are based on theoretical assumptions. Even though our limitations can be accurate even, this accuracy is not perfect; we try to achieve the best at finding a conclusion. Yet, the uncertainty of the conclusion can still prove it false, and so the science turns provisional. Math is a very different area of knowledge. The only difference today is that math is much more complex in applications of basic principles. The definition of math is the system of quantities, forms, space and their relationships in use of numbers and symbols.   The Egyptians came up with simple functions such as addition. These functions are still useful since we substitute symbols to represent difference concepts in reality. The symbols and applications might differ, but the expressions stay the same. The ancient Greeks used symbols rather than numbers; equations, they came up with were the same. One may deduce that math is not a provisional subject. In many ways, math is the foundation of other areas of knowledge such as analysis and measurement in sciences. In some cases, wed never find out more about certain topics. For instance, the string theory can only be proven with math because physically we cant comprehend eleven dimensions. Multiplication will not change over time comp ared to a scholar learning how his brain works- he will soon have to update his knowledge because what we know in the field of science always changes. Today, scientists try to link the missing puzzle pieces; however, once a scientist connects a puzzle to the whole picture, and it is perceived to be the correct placement, then more and more questions arise. Furthermore, in math, once something is proved, it is no longer contested. For example, today nobody should argue that two multiplied by five is not ten. Math, arguably, is a human construct; it is up to us to make up symbols that would represent the patterns that we encounter. The knowledge and conclusions of math arent that provisional but its application is. Like science, art has many changing conclusions. When a person looks at a picture, he invariably interprets it and evaluates it. However, when a different individual looks at the same picture, he might interpret it in a very different way. These interpretations can vary because of many aspects. Ones age, for example; there is a painting of a cow (Arnhart). An elder might think of it as a source of meat, while a boy might see a joy ride (Arnhart). Thus each person has concluded on a different interpretation and this uncertainly on which is the true conclusion makes the art as a area of knowledge provisional. Generally, conclusions in art are based on the frames of reference of the person that is evaluating the art piece with a personal experience or posteriori knowledge. Thus, art is provisional in nature because even one painting might have different conclusions based on it. By comparing math, sciences, and art one can see that the knowledge gained from the sciences change; however, it is not the only subject that is provisional, that is shown through subjects such as art and history. Even one art piece can have many conclusions associated with it. The statement what separates science from all other human activities is its belief in the provisional nature of all conclusions (Michael Shermer, www.edge.com) is only partly true since science is provisional; however, that doesnt separate it from all other human activities. Math is an example of a static subject whereas, science is a subject open to debates and updates. We might think that sciences are not important to us since what we know now as the truth always changes; however, we must understand that a person who is confident that he knows everything will never learn. Through science we accept that our knowledge is limited, and we strive to improve what we already have. Even though some scientific knowle dge is considered be truth, it is still provisional since science is focused on disproving predictions and not on gathering enough evidence to make the conclusion valid or sound. Without science, one may argue, we would never achieve the advancements that we are fortunate to have today. Word Count: 1652

Heritage as an Idea of Oneself in Bless Me Ultima and The Lone Ranger a

Heritage as an Idea of Oneself in Bless Me Ultima and The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven  Ã‚        Ã‚  Ã‚   Traveling through humanity is a never-ending story.   Traveling through ethnicity is an ever changing journey.   Is race or culture a matter of color?   Is it a way of life;   or a decision an individual makes?   Is it an idea one has of themselves?   In the novels, Bless Me Ultima (Anaya 1972) and The Lone Ranger and Tonto Fistfight in Heaven (Alexie 1993), two different minority characters, Tony and Victor, give voice to their journey of growing up and finding their place in the world in regards to their heritage. The characters, in Anaya's and Alexie's novels, relate to a dominant culture, pursue balance in their life by searching traditions of the past, and attempt to blend their heritage into the present allowing them passage to the future.   Their journeys differ in respect to heritage and family situation.   Their journeys parallel considering that they are both male, belong to a minority, seek individual identity, and search for their place on the planet.   Each seeks peace within and without.   Although, their journeys are different, they are the same. The characters in the two novels, belong to two different cultures.   In Rudolfo Anaya's Bless Me Ultima, the young, Mexican-American Anthony Juan Marez y Luna (Tony) struggles between two ways of being a Spanish-Mexican-American while also dealing with the dominant white culture.  Ã‚   Tony's mother and father, although both born in New Mexico, come from two different cultures.   His father, a Marez, comes from a long line of Spanish "conquistadores, men as restless as the seas they sailed and as free as the land they conquered" (Anaya 6).   Tony's mother, a Luna, comes fr... ... America, 1982.   80-167. Meacham, Jon. "Redefining Race in America."   Newsweek September 2000:   38-41. Mitchell, Carol. "Rudolfo Anaya's Bless Me, Ultima:   Folk Culture in Literature." Critique:   Studies in Modern Fiction. 17.1 1980, 55-64. Smoke Signals.   Dir. Chris Eyre.   With Adam Beach and Evan Adams. Miramax/Shadowcatcher.   Prod. Larry Estes and Scott Rosenfelt. 1997. Tonn, Horst.   "Bless Me, Ultima:   A Fictional Response to Times of Transition." Aztlan, 18.1 1987, 59-68. White, Craig.   "American Minority Literature."   Handout.   University of Houston-Clear Lake.   Houston. 24 August 2000. - - - - - "American Minority Literature."   Notes.   27 September 2000. Yancey, William L.   Ericksen, Eugene P.; and Juliani, Richard N.   "Emergent Ethnicity:   A Review and Reformulation." American Sociological Review 41.3 1976: 391-403.      

Investigation for Magnesium Oxide

Hypothesis – The idea I aim to test in this experiment is the relationship between the mass of magnesium and mass of oxygen once the magnesium has been heated and reacted with the oxygen. There will be 3 variables in this experiment. The independent variable will be the mass of magnesium ribbon as different measurements will be taken and used for each trial. The dependant variable will be the mass of Magnesium Oxide, this is a measured variable as the mass of oxygen can be calculated and will enable us to determine the formula for Magnesium Oxide. The controlled variable is that the Magnesium used is possibly from the same ribbon and after being cut into lengths was stored in the same way in plastic containers. Preliminary – I originally did a preliminary test with Iron wool where we used a similar method but Testthe iron wool was held over the flame by tongs and not contained within a crucible. We learnt from this experiment the importance of the crucible to contain all of the metal for an accurate test because the iron wool broke off as it heated and we were left with a lot of the iron wool on the bench mats around the Bunsen burner so our calculation of the mass of iron oxide was not accurate as we had not contained all the wool and couldn’t accurately collect the pieces around that had come away, therefore no giving a true mass of Iron Oxide. Prediction – I predict that when the magnesium and the Oxygen combine and react together the magnesium will oxidise and become heavier. I expect to see a straight line pattern from these results as I believe the more Magnesium there is the more Oxygen it will take on to form the Magnesium Oxide and so believe the results should gradually get heavier and heavier as the Magnesium gets heavier and heavier. The equation for this investigation would be Mg + O2 ?MgO which would balance as 2Mg + O2 ? 2MgO. This is done as the Oxygen has two molecules which would need two Magnesium molecules to balance it out. The physical changes I expect to take place are heat and light as I expect the Magnesium to change colour as it is heated up and reacts with the Oxygen. The Chemical changes I expect to take place are that a new substance will be made and a new formula will be formed. A new substance will be made in the form of smoke and the new formula will be MgO. Apparatus – *Goggles*Crucible and Lid *Bench Mat*Tongs *Tripod*Varied lengths of Magnesium ribbon *Bunsen burner*Scales *Pipe-clay triangle*200g weight Method – All the apparatus was set up to ensure that the experiment was carried out safely. Goggles were worn and the bench mat was put in place in case any sparks or parts of the experiment went wrong to protect our eyes and the work surface. The tripod and pipe clay triangle were used to keep the crucible safely above the heat. The Bunsen burner was used to heat the magnesium and was set to a fierce blue flame. The crucible held the Magnesium above the Bunsen burner, and the lid contained as much smoke as possible to help the reaction to take place. The crucible lid and tongs were used to occasionally let in the oxygen and then replace the lid safely. The apparatus was set up as above and as per the diagram to being the experiment. I first checked the scales using a 200g weight to check their accuracy. When I weighed the 200g weight on the scales prior to the experiment the scales weighed in at 1. 038kg however, as this was a large weight by comparison to my crucible I didn’t account for this slight measurement in my results as I decided it would make the calculations too low as my crucible was only a fraction of the weight of 200g and so for the purposes of this experiment wouldn’t alter my results enough to justify it. I then measured the crucible without the lid to find out its mass (22. 27g), once recorded I then measured the Magnesium ribbon (0. 9g) I then measured the two together to check the accuracy and got a mass of 22. 56g which meant my previous measurements were reliable. The next step was to put the crucible with the magnesium inside and the lid on onto the pipe clay triangle above the fierce blue flame of the Bunsen burner. The lid remained on only except for occasionally lifting it and quickly replacing it to let more oxygen into the magnesium but to t ry and keep as much smoke in as possible. Once the Magnesium Oxide stopped smoking when the lid was lifted the experiment was complete and I turned off the flame and left the crucible to cool. Once cooled I weighed the crucible with the newly formed Magnesium oxide (22. 72g) and then was able to subtract my previous figure of 22. 56g from this to give a difference of 0. 16g. This 0. 16g was my mass of Oxygen. Results – It can be seen from the results that there is a direct relationship between the mass of Magnesium to start with and the mass of Oxygen in the Magnesium Oxide. Using my results I worked out the ratio between Magnesium and Oxygen, from these results it suggests that the ratio is 1. 2 moles of Magnesium to 1 mole of Oxygen. However you cannot have 1. of an atom and so these results can be rounded up to a ratio of 1:1 which would reflect the equation I had predicted of MgO. Conclusion – The mass of Magnesium got heavier in my experiment by 0. 16g because the Magnesium joined with the Oxygen. Other students’ result ranged from 0. 09 – 0. 46 and apart from one anomalous result the heavier the Magnesium was the higher the mass of Oxygen was. Each measure of Magnesium was only tried once and each measurement was done by an individual and so this may account for the random errors in our findings as shown on the graph, but overall our results were fairly evenly spread. From the results I was able to plot a straight line graph by using a line of best fit; which ran parallel to the theoretical line of best fit. My predictions for this experiment were right as the results show that the more Magnesium ribbon that was used the more oxygen was needed to react with it and so the gradient was steady at about a 450 angle gradually increasing in mass as the Magnesium mass increased. I would say there was one anomalous result as it was significantly below the line of best fit but this can be put down to a number of things such as different scales being used, different people doing each result or simple human error. Our line of best fit was slightly below the theoretical line of best fit for this experiment and I mainly believe this could be due to a systematic error such as the scales we used not being precisely accurate. This may however account for the systematic error of the line of best fit being lower than the theoretical line as that slight change along with random errors may have lowered the results; but the results were still valid as the line of best fit was parallel to the theoretical line meaning we had a constant of the scales being slightly light. As can be seen from the results of our Spearman’s rho and Chi Tests our results were within % of the theoretical results and so this suggests we did an accurate and valid test. We did the Spearman’s rho test as this is a measure of the linear relationship between the two variables and shows us that there is a connection between our results and the theoretical ones. The Spearman’s Rho test shows the accuracy of our res ults and our calculation came in at 98. 7% so it proves our results were very accurate. We did the Chi squared test as this determined whether there was a significant different between the theoretical frequencies and the observed/practical frequencies comparing the validity of the results. At least 95% result in the Chi-squared test would prove to be valid and our result was 99. 99% so it shows our results were definitely valid according to the chi-squared test. We did the Spearman’s and Chi-squared tests via the Excel calculations as shown on the table of results. Evaluation – Overall our results were very accurate but there were some random and systematic errors which could be reduced or resolved if we did further experiments. We could have done re-tests for all the Magnesium masses and taken a mean average of those results to get a more accurate reading this would possibly have reduced any systematic errors. I made the test fair by taking the measurements of the crucible and lid and keeping them the same so that I can compare the results between the Magnesium and Oxygen. Also if the same person had carried out each experiment instead of each student doing a different measurement it may have been more accurate as the method may have changed slightly between each student, for example, one person may have lifted the lid a lot more frequently of for longer periods than another. The difference in the scales will also account for the systematic error as shown on the graph. Also the amount of smoke which was let out during each experiment will have varied between each student as the results were being gathered individually and the amount of smoke which escaped may account for some random errors within our results which is why our results are not all as in line as the theoretical results. And e had to find a line of best fit rather than a clear line which went through each individual result as the theory would suggest. If I were to do this experiment again I would repeat the tests with each mass of Magnesium and take a mean average so as to achieve a more accurate result I would also ensure that each mass of magnesium was the same; as in our experiment some students coiled the Magnesium up in the crucible and others ripped it into little strips. By placing the Magnesium in the crucible in different ways it may affect how much oxygen can get to the ribbon, if it is coiled up for example it may need to be prodded and moved to allow all the Magnesium to have exposure to the Oxygen whereas the smaller strips may be more exposed without as much intervention. On both accounts though if you do need to prod the magnesium in that time you may be letting a lot of smoke out as the lid would obviously need to be off the crucible and so this would also need to be taken into consideration. This is why if the magnesium was placed in the crucible in exactly the same way it would make the results more accurate. To take it one step further you could time the lifting of the lid to make it more accurate, for example, lifting it every 30 seconds for a period of say 2 seconds would mean that each mass of Magnesium would be getting the same time exposed to the oxygen and so a more accurate reading of the amount of Oxygen it gains would be achieved if this was carried out with a stop watch. Also if I were to improve the investigation for next time I would increase the number of Magnesium Masses used to gain a more accurate result and having more results would also make any anomalous results stand out and also expose more random and systematic errors which could be dealt with.

cyber ethics essays

cyber ethics essays The article I choose was written by Jennifer Howland and encompasses her familys views to the Recording Industry Association of America lawsuit of 261 people, including teens, elderly, occasional downloaders, and frequent downloaders of music. Mrs. Howland has two daughters whose life is based around the computer. Everything from socializing, to gaming, to music listening. Her daughters share music files with their friends like most teens, but after the lawsuit from RIAA Mr. Howland had to end usage of P2P programs which enabled the girls to share music with their friends. He noted that one of the teens sued had to settle for $2,000, and with one of his daughters off to college soon he has no room for financial missteps. Jennifer then notes that she ordered here children not to download for fear of not getting sued, not because she thought the action its self was wrong. She was telling them that it wasnt the principle thats important, its the consequences themselves. She then raises the issue that the music industry tries to increase our sense of compunction by arguing that downloaders are, in effect, stealing musicians livelihoods. Yet, many artist including David Bowie, and countless smaller band tend to believe that it creates a medium for further exposure. With the smaller band you can sample a song or two, and if you like it find out where they are touring next, or purchases the CD outright. I tend to agree with this style of though. I have downloaded my share of music, mostly music that doesnt have a market in this area just yet, but when I stumble across something new that I like, I look into touring dates, and album info. I believe that this is a great way to increase exposure of bands that get little radio play, or just havent made the leap to being signed by a record label. As far as the bigger bands out there that have Made It what ...