QMRThe Shulchan Aruch (and its forerunner, the Beit Yosef) follow the same structure as Arba'ah Turim by Rabbi Jacob ben Asher. These books were written from the standpoint of Sephardi Minhag, other works entitled Shulchan Aruch or Kitzur Shulcan Aruch cited below are written from the standpoint of Ashkenazi Minhag. There are four sections, each subdivided into many chapters and paragraphs.
Orach Chayim – laws of prayer and synagogue, Sabbath, holidays;
Yoreh De'ah – laws of kashrut; religious conversion; Mourning; Laws pertaining to Israel; Laws of family purity
Even Ha'ezer – laws of marriage, divorce and related issues;
Choshen Mishpat – laws of finance, financial responsibility, damages (personal and financial), and the rules of the Bet Din, as well as the laws of witnesses
Water[edit]
水 Sui or mizu, meaning "Water", represents the fluid, flowing, formless things in the world. Outside of the obvious example of rivers and the lake, plants are also categorized under sui, as they adapt to their environment, growing and changing according to the direction of the sun and the changing seasons. Blood and other bodily fluids are represented by sui, as are mental or emotionaltendencies towards adaptation and change. Sui can be associated with emotion, defensiveness, adaptability, flexibility, suppleness, and magnetism.
Fire[edit]
火 Ka or hi, meaning "Fire", represents the energetic, forceful, moving things in the world. Animals, capable of movement and full of forceful energy, are primary examples of ka objects. Bodily, ka represents our metabolism and body heat, and in the mental and emotional realms, it represents drive and passion. ka can be associated with security, motivation, desire, intention, and an outgoing spirit.
Wind[edit]
風 Fū or kaze, meaning "Wind", represents things that grow, expand, and enjoy freedom of movement. Aside from air, smoke, and the like, fū can in some ways be best represented by the human mind. As we grow physically, we learn and expand mentally as well, in terms of our knowledge, our experiences, and our personalities. Fū represents breathing, and the internal processes associated with respiration. Mentally and emotionally, it represents an "open-minded" attitude and carefree feeling. It can be associated with will, elusiveness, evasiveness, benevolence, compassion, and wisdom.
Void (ether)[edit]
See also: Śūnyatā
空 Kū or sora, most often translated as "Void", but also meaning "sky" or "Heaven", represents those things beyond our everyday experience, particularly those things composed of pure energy. Bodily, kū represents spirit, thought, and creative energy. It represents our ability to think and to communicate, as well as our creativity. It can also be associated with power, creativity, spontaneity, and inventiveness.
Kū is of particular importance as the highest of the elements. In martial arts, particularly in fictional tales where the fighting discipline is blended with magic or the occult, one often invokes the power of the Void to connect to the quintessential creative energy of the world. A warrior properly attuned to the Void can sense their surroundings and act without thinking, and without using their "physical senses".
|
|
QMRThe five elements philosophy in Japanese Buddhism, godai (五大?, lit. "five great"), is derived from Indian Vastu shastra philosophy and Buddhist beliefs. It is perhaps best known in the Western world for its use in Miyamoto Musashi's famous text Gorin-no-sho (The Book of Five Rings), in which he explains different aspects of swordsmanship by assigning each aspect to an element.
Contents [hide]
1 The Elements
1.1 Earth
1.2 Water
1.3 Fire
1.4 Wind
1.5 Void (ether)
2 Representations of the Godai
3 See also
4 External links
The Elements[edit]
The five elements are, in ascending order of power, Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, and Void.
Earth[edit]
地 Chi (sometimes ji) or tsuchi, meaning "Earth", represents the hard, solid objects of the earth. The most basic example of chi is in a stone. Stones are highly resistant to movement or change, as is anything heavily influenced by chi. In people, the bones, muscles and tissues are represented by chi. Emotionally, chi is predominantly associated with stubbornness, collectiveness, stability, physicality, and gravity. It is a desire to have things remain as they are; a resistance to change. In the mind, it is confidence. When under the influence of this chi mode or "mood", we are aware of our own physicality and sureness of action. (Note: This is a separate concept from the energy-force, pronounced in Chinese as qì (also written ch'i) and in Japanese as ki, and written alternatively as 気, 氣, or 气.)
|
|
QMRThe Four Thirds System is a standard created by Olympus and Eastman Kodak for digital single-lens reflex camera (DSLR) and mirrorless camera design and development.[1]
|
|
HFACS Level 3: Unsafe Supervision[edit]
The Unsafe Supervision level is divided into four categories.
Inadequate Supervision: The role of any supervisor is to provide their staff with the opportunity to succeed, and they must provide guidance, training, leadership, oversight, or incentives to ensure the task is performed safely and efficiently.
Plan Inappropriate Operation: Refers to those operations that can be acceptable and different during emergencies, but unacceptable during normal operation (e.g., risk management, crew pairing, operational tempo).
Fail to Correct Known Problem: Refers to those instances when deficiencies are known to the supervisor, yet are allowed to continue unabated (e.g. report unsafe tendencies, initiate corrective action, correct a safety hazard).
Supervisory Violation: Refers to those instances when existing rules and regulations are willfully disregarded by supervisors (e.g. enforcement of rules and regulations, authorized unnecessary hazard, inadequate documentation).
HFACS Level 4: Organizational Influences[edit]
The Organizational Influences level is divided into three categories.
Resource Management: Refers to the organizational-level decision-making regarding the allocation and maintenance of organizational assets (e.g. human resources, monetary/budget resources, equipment/facility recourse).
Organizational Climate: Refers to the working atmosphere within the organization (e.g. structure, policies, culture).
Operational Process: Refers to organizational decisions and rules that govern the everyday activities within an organization (e.g. operations, procedures, oversight).
HFACS Taxonomyasdasd[edit]
The HFACS taxonomy describes four levels within Reason's model and are described below.[4][5]
HFACS Level 1: Unsafe Acts[edit]
The Unsafe Acts level is divided into two categories - errors and violations - and these two categories are then divided into subcategories. Errors are unintentional behaviors, while violations are a willful disregard of the rules and regulations.
Errors
Skill-Based Errors: Errors which occur in the operator’s execution of a routine, highly practiced task relating to procedure, training or proficiency and result in an unsafe a situation (e.g., fail to prioritize attention, checklist error, negative habit).
Decision Errors: Errors which occur when the behaviors or actions of the operators proceed as intended yet the chosen plan proves inadequate to achieve the desired end-state and results in an unsafe situation (e.g. exceeded ability, rule-based error, inappropriate procedure).
Perceptual Errors: Errors which occur when an operator's sensory input is degraded and a decision is made based upon faulty information.
Violations
Routine Violations: Violations which are a habitual action on the part of the operator and are tolerated by the governing authority.
Exceptional Violations: Violations which are an isolated departure from authority, neither typical of the individual nor condoned by management.
HFACS Level 2: Preconditions for Unsafe Acts[edit]
The Preconditions for Unsafe Acts level is divided into three categories - environmental factors, condition of operators, and personnel factors - and these three categories are then divided into subcategories. Environmental factors refer to the physical and technological factors that affect practices, conditions and actions of individual and result in human error or an unsafe situation. Condition of operators refer to the adverse mental state, adverse physiological state, and physical/mental limitations factors that affect practices, conditions or actions of individuals and result in human error or an unsafe situation. Personnel factors refer to the crew resource management and personal readiness factors that affect practices, conditions or actions of individuals, and result in human error or an unsafe situation.
Environmental Factors
Physical Environment: Refers to factors that include both the operational setting (e.g., weather, altitude, terrain) and the ambient environment (e.g., heat, vibration, lighting, toxins).
Technological Environment: Refers to factors that include a variety of design and automation issues including the design of equipment and controls, display/interface characteristics, checklist layouts, task factors and automation.
Condition of Operators
Adverse Mental State: Refers to factors that include those mental conditions that affect performance (e.g., stress, mental fatigue, motivation).
Adverse Physiological State: Refers to factors that include those medical or physiological conditions that affect performance (e.g. medical illness, physical fatigue, hypoxia).
Physical/Mental Limitation: Refers to when an operator lacks the physical or mental capabilities to cope with a situation, and this affects performance (e.g. visual limitations, insufficient reaction time).
Personnel Factors
Crew Resource Management: Refers to factors that include communication, coordination, planning, and teamwork issues.
Personal Readiness: Refers to off-duty activities required to perform optimally on the job such as adhering to crew rest requirements, alcohol restrictions, and other off-duty mandates.
|
|
QMRThe Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) identifies the human causes of an accident and provides a tool to assist in the investigation process and target training and prevention efforts.[1] It was developed by Dr Scott Shappell and Dr Doug Wiegmann, Civil Aviation Medical Institute and University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA, respectively, in response to a trend that showed some form of human error was a primary causal factor in 80% of all flight accidents in the Navy and Marine Corps.[1]
HFACS is based in the "Swiss Cheese" model of human error [2] which looks at four levels of active errors and latent failures, including unsafe acts, preconditions for unsafe acts, unsafe supervision, and organizational influences.[1] It is a comprehensive human error framework, that folded Reason's ideas into the applied setting, defining 19 causal categories within four levels of human failure.[3]
|
|
A tessarine is a four by four matrix.In abstract algebra, a tessarine or bicomplex number is a hypercomplex number in a commutative, associative algebra over real numbers with two imaginary units (designated i and k).
Contents [hide]
1 History
2 Linear representation
2.1 Bicomplex number
2.2 Direct sum C ⊕ C
2.3 Conic quaternion / octonion / sedenion, bicomplex number
2.4 Quotient rings of polynomials
3 Algebraic properties
4 Polynomial roots
5 Notes and references
History[edit]
The subject of multiple imaginary units was examined in the 1840s. In a long series "On quaternions, or on a new system of imaginaries in algebra" beginning in 1844 in Philosophical Magazine, William Rowan Hamilton communicated a system multiplying according to the quaternion group. In 1848 Thomas Kirkman reported[1] on his correspondence with Arthur Cayley regarding equations on the units determining a system of hypercomplex numbers.
In 1848 James Cockle introduced the tessarines in a series of articles in Philosophical Magazine.[2] A tessarine is a hypercomplex number of the form
t = w + x i + y j + z k, \quad w, x, y, z \in \mathbb{R}
where i j = j i = k, \quad i^2 = -1, \quad j^2 = +1 . Cockle used tessarines to isolate the hyperbolic cosine series and the hyperbolic sine series in the exponential series. He also showed how zero divisors arise in tessarines, inspiring him to use the term "impossibles." The tessarines are now best known for their subalgebra of real tessarines t = w + y j \ , also called split-complex numbers, which express the parametrization of the unit hyperbola.
In 1892 Corrado Segre introduced[3] bicomplex numbers in Mathematische Annalen, which form an algebra isomorphic to the tessarines (see section below). As commutative hypercomplex numbers, the tessarine algebra has been advocated by Clyde M. Davenport (1978, 1991, 2008) (exchange j and −k in his multiplication table).[4][5][6] Davenport has noted the isomorphism with the direct sum of the complex number plane with itself. Tessarines have also been applied in digital signal processing.[7][8][9] In 2009 mathematicians proved a fundamental theorem of tessarine algebra: a polynomial of degree n with tessarine coefficients has n2 roots, counting multiplicity.[10]
|
|
QMRIn mathematics, Euler's four-square identity says that the product of two numbers, each of which is a sum of four squares, is itself a sum of four squares. Specifically:
(a_1^2+a_2^2+a_3^2+a_4^2)(b_1^2+b_2^2+b_3^2+b_4^2)=\,
(a_1 b_1 + a_2 b_2 + a_3 b_3 + a_4 b_4)^2 +\,
(a_1 b_2 - a_2 b_1 + a_3 b_4 - a_4 b_3)^2 +\,
(a_1 b_3 - a_2 b_4 - a_3 b_1 + a_4 b_2)^2 +\,
(a_1 b_4 + a_2 b_3 - a_3 b_2 - a_4 b_1)^2.\,
Euler wrote about this identity in a letter dated May 4, 1748 to Goldbach[1][2] (but he used a different sign convention from the above). It can be proven with elementary algebra and holds in every commutative ring. If the a_k and b_k are real numbers, a more elegant proof is available: the identity expresses the fact that the absolute value of the product of two quaternions is equal to the product of their absolute values, in the same way that the Brahmagupta–Fibonacci two-square identity does for complex numbers.
The identity was used by Lagrange to prove his four square theorem. More specifically, it implies that it is sufficient to prove the theorem for prime numbers, after which the more general theorem follows. The sign convention used above corresponds to the signs obtained by multiplying two quaternions. Other sign conventions can be obtained by changing any a_k to -a_k, b_k to -b_k, or by changing the signs inside any of the squared terms on the right hand side.
|
|
QMRHistory of quaternions
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quaternion plaque on Brougham (Broom) Bridge, Dublin, which says:
Here as he walked by on the 16th of October 1843 Sir William Rowan Hamilton in a flash of genius discovered the fundamental formula for quaternion multiplication
i2 = j2 = k2 = ijk = −1
& cut it on a stone of this bridge.
In mathematics, quaternions are a non-commutative number system that extends the complex numbers. Quaternions and their applications to rotations were first described in print by Olinde Rodrigues in all but name in 1840, but independently discovered by Irish mathematician Sir William Rowan Hamilton in 1843 and applied to mechanics in three-dimensional space. They find uses in both theoretical and applied mathematics, in particular for calculations involving three-dimensional rotations. This article describes the original invention and subsequent development of quaternions.
Hamilton's discovery[edit]
In 1843, Hamilton knew that the complex numbers could be viewed as points in a plane and that they could be added and multiplied together using certain geometric operations. Hamilton sought to find a way to do the same for points in space. Points in space can be represented by their coordinates, which are triples of numbers and have an obvious addition, but Hamilton had difficulty defining the appropriate multiplication.
According to a letter Hamilton wrote later to his son Archibald:
Every morning in the early part of October 1843, on my coming down to breakfast, your brother William Edward and yourself used to ask me: "Well, Papa, can you multiply triples?" Whereto I was always obliged to reply, with a sad shake of the head, "No, I can only add and subtract them."
On October 16, 1843, Hamilton and his wife took a walk along the Royal Canal in Dublin. While they walked across Brougham Bridge (now Broom Bridge), a solution suddenly occurred to him. While he could not "multiply triples", he saw a way to do so for quadruples. By using three of the numbers in the quadruple as the points of a coordinate in space, Hamilton could represent points in space by his new system of numbers. He then carved the basic rules for multiplication into the bridge:
i^2 = j^2 = k^2 = ijk = -1.\,
Hamilton called a quadruple with these rules of multiplication a quaternion, and he devoted the remainder of his life to studying and teaching them. From 1844 to 1850 Philosophical Magazine communicated Hamilton's exposition of quaternions.[1] In 1853 he issued Lectures on Quaternions, a comprehensive treatise that also described biquaternions. The facility of the algebra in expressing geometric relationships led to broad acceptance of the method, several compositions by other authors, and stimulation of applied algebra generally. As mathematical terminology has grown since that time, and usage of some terms has changed, the traditional expressions are referred to classical Hamiltonian quaternions.
Precursors[edit]
Hamilton's innovation consisted of expressing quaternions as an algebra over R. The formulae for the multiplication of quaternions are implicit in the four squares formula devised by Leonhard Euler in 1748; Olinde Rodrigues applied this formula to representing rotations in 1840.[2]
Response[edit]
The special claims of quaternions as the algebra of four-dimensional space were challenged by James Cockle with his exhibits in 1848 and 1849 of tessarines and coquaternions as alternatives. Nevertheless, these new algebras from Cockle were, in fact, to be found inside Hamilton’s biquaternions. From Italy, in 1858 Giusto Bellavitis responded[3] to connect Hamilton’s vector theory with his theory of equipollences of directed line segments.
Jules Hoüel led the response from France in 1874 with a textbook on the elements of quaternions. To ease the study of versors, he introduced "biradials" to designate great circle arcs on the sphere. Then the quaternion algebra provided the foundation for spherical trigonometry introduced in chapter 9. Hoüel replaced Hamilton’s basis vectors i,j,k with i1, i2, and i3. The variety of typefaces (fonts) available led Hoüel to another notational innovation: A designates a point, a and \mathrm{a} are algebraic quantities, and in the equation for a quaternion
\mathcal{ A} = \cos \alpha + \mathbf{A} \sin \alpha ,
\mathbf{A} is a vector and α is an angle. This style of quaternion exposition was perpetuated by Charles-Ange Laisant[4] and Alexander Macfarlane.[5]
William K. Clifford expanded the types of biquaternions, and explored elliptic space, a geometry in which the points can be viewed as versors. Fascination with quaternions began before the language of set theory and mathematical structures was available. In fact, there was little mathematical notation before the Formulario mathematico. The quaternions stimulated these advances: For example, the idea of a vector space borrowed Hamilton’s term but changed its meaning. Under the modern understanding, any quaternion is a vector in four-dimensional space. (Hamilton’s vectors lie in the subspace with scalar part zero.)
Since quaternions demand their readers to imagine four dimensions, there is a metaphysical aspect to their invocation. Quaternions are a philosophical object. Setting quaternions before freshmen students of engineering asks too much. Yet the utility of dot products and cross products in three-dimensional space, for illustration of processes, calls for the uses of these operations which are cut out of the quaternion product. Thus Willard Gibbs and Oliver Heaviside made this accommodation, for pragmatism, to avoid the distracting superstructure.[6]
For mathematicians the quaternion structure became familiar and lost its status as something mathematically interesting. Thus in England, when Buchheim prepared a paper on biquaternions, it was published in the American Journal of Mathematics since some novelty in the subject lingered there. Research turned to hypercomplex numbers more generally. For instance, Thomas Kirkman and Arthur Cayley considered the number of equations between basis vectors would be necessary to determine a unique system. The wide interest that quaternions aroused around the world resulted in the Quaternion Society. In contemporary mathematics, the division ring of quaternions exemplifies an algebra over a field.
|
|
QMRFolsom v. Marsh, 9. F.Cas. 342 (C.C.D. Mass. 1841)[1] is a 19th-century US copyright case, widely regarded as the first "fair use" case in the United States. The opinion was written by Judge Joseph Story, who set forth four factors that are in use today, and were ultimately encoded in the Copyright Act of 1976 as 17 U.S.C. § 107.
|
|
QMRResearchers Cooke and Michie suggested, using statistical analysis involving confirmatory factor analysis,[19] that a three-factor structure may provide a better model, with those items from factor 2 strictly relating to antisocial behavior (criminal versatility, juvenile delinquency, revocation of conditional release, early behavioral problems and poor behavioral controls) removed. The remaining items would be divided into three factors: arrogant and deceitful interpersonal style, deficient affective experience and impulsive and irresponsible behavioral style.[19] Hare and colleagues have published detailed critiques of the three-factor model and argue that there are statistical and conceptual problems.[20]
In the most recent edition of the PCL-R, Hare adds a fourth antisocial behavior factor, consisting of those factor-2 items excluded in the previous model.[2] Again, these models are presumed to be hierarchical with a single, unified psychopathy disorder underlying the distinct but correlated factors.[21]
The Cooke & Michie hierarchical three-factor model has severe statistical problems—i.e., it actually contains ten factors and results in impossible parameters (negative variances)—as well as conceptual problems. Hare and colleagues have published detailed critiques of the Cooke & Michie model.[22] New evidence, across a range of samples and diverse measures, now supports a four-factor model of the psychopathy construct,[23] which represents the interpersonal, affective, lifestyle, and overt antisocial features of the personality disorder.
|
|
QMRFour Factor Analysis. From possession-based analysis, there are four statistical team factors that summarize most of what matters in terms of winning or losing: effective field goal percentage, offensive rebounding percentage, turnovers per possession, and free throws attempted per field goal attempted
|
|
QMRFake Four Inc. is an independent record label based in New Haven, Connecticut. It was founded by Ceschi and David Ramos in 2008.[1][2]
According to an interview with Ceschi on Ugsmag.com,[3] the Ramos brothers started Fake Four Inc. with help from Grimm Image Records in San Bernardino, California and Squids Eye Recording Collective in Dayton, Ohio as an outlet to release and distribute their personal music projects and those of their friends. Since the initial release This Up Here by David Ramos, Fake Four Inc. has been an entirely self-sufficient label.
|
|
QMRIn 1992, Michael J. Lambert summarized psychotherapy outcome research and grouped the factors of successful therapy into four areas, ordered by hypothesized percent of change in clients as a function of therapeutic factors: first, extratherapeutic change (40%), those factors that are qualities of the client or qualities of his or her environment and that aid in recovery regardless of his or her participation in therapy; second, common factors (30%) that are found in a variety of therapy approaches, such as empathy and the therapeutic relationship; third, expectancy (15%), the portion of improvement that results from the client's expectation of help or belief in the rationale or effectiveness of therapy; fourth, techniques (15%), those factors unique to specific therapies and tailored to treatment of specific problems.[24] Lambert's research later inspired a book on common factors theory in the practice of therapy titled The Heart and Soul of Change.[25
|
|
Politics[edit]
The political is defined as the practices and meanings associated with basic issues of social power, such as organization, authorization, legitimation and regulation. The parameters of this area extend beyond the conventional sense of politics to include not only issues of public and private governance but more broadly social relations in general.
Organization and governance
Law and justice
Communication and critique
Representation and negotiation
Security and accord
Dialogue and reconciliation
Ethics and accountability
Culture[edit]
The cultural domain is defined as the practices, discourses, and material expressions, which, over time, express continuities and discontinuities of social meaning.
Identity and engagement
Creativity and recreation
Memory and projection
Belief and ideas
Gender and generations
Enquiry and learning
Wellbeing and health
|
|
QMRDomains and subdomains[edit]
The Circles of Sustainability approach is explicitly critical of other domain models such as the triple bottom line that treat economics as if it is outside the social, or that treat the environment as an externality. It uses a four-domain model - economics, ecology, politics and culture. In each of these domains there are 7 subdomains.
Economics[edit]
The economic domain is defined as the practices and meanings associated with the production, use, and management of resources, where the concept of ‘resources’ is used in the broadest sense of that word.
Production and resourcing
Exchange and transfer
Accounting and regulation
Consumption and use
Labour and welfare
Technology and infrastructure
Wealth and distribution
Ecology[edit]
The ecological domain is defined as the practices and meanings that occur across the intersection between the social and the natural realms, focusing on the important dimension of human engagement with and within nature, but also including the built-environment.
Materials and energy
Water and air
Flora and fauna
Habitat and settlements
Built-form and transport
Embodiment and sustenance
Emission and waste
|
|
Circles of Sustainability is a method for understanding and assessing sustainability, and for managing projects directed towards socially sustainable outcomes.[1] It is intended to handle 'seemingly intractable problems'[2] such as outlined in sustainable development debates. The method is mostly used for cities and urban settlements.
Circles of Sustainability, and its treatment of the social domains of ecology, economics, politics and culture, provides the empirical dimension of an approach called 'engaged theory'. Developing Circles of Sustainability is part of larger project called 'Circles of Social Life', using the same four-domain model to analyze questions of resilience, adaptation, security, reconciliation. It is also being used in relation to thematics such as 'Circles of Child Wellbeing' (with World Vision).
The rationale for this new method is clear. As evidenced by Rio+20 and the UN Habitat World Urban Forum in Napoli (2012) and Medellin (2014), sustainability assessment is on the global agenda.[3] However, the more complex the problems, the less useful current sustainability assessment tools seem to be for assessing across different domains: economics, ecology, politics and culture.[4] For example, the Triple Bottom Line approach tends to take the economy as its primary point of focus with the domain of the environmental as the key externality. Secondly, the one-dimensional quantitative basis of many such methods means that they have limited purchase on complex qualitative issues. Thirdly, the size, scope and sheer number of indicators included within many such methods means that they are often unwieldy and resist effective implementation. Fourthly, the restricted focus of current indicator sets means that they do not work across different organizational and social settings—corporations and other institutions, cities, and communities.[5] Most indicator approaches, such as the Global Reporting Initiative or ISO14031, have been limited to large corporate organizations with easily definable legal and economic boundaries. Circles of Sustainability was developed to respond to those limitations.
|
|
QMRIn April 2003, under the directorship of David Teller, a framework called the Melbourne Model was developed that went beyond the Ten Principles. It begins by drawing the resources of government, business and civil society into a cross-sector partnership in order to develop a practical project that addresses a seemingly intractable urban issue. In 2007, the current Director, Paul James (2007–present) and his colleagues Dr Andy Scerri and Dr Liam Magee, took this methodology further by integrating the partnership model with a four-domain sustainability framework called 'Circles of Sustainability'.[16]
|
|
The fourth factor measures the effect that the allegedly infringing use has had on the copyright owner's ability to exploit his or her original work. The court not only investigates whether the defendant's specific use of the work has significantly harmed the copyright owner's market, but also whether such uses in general, if widespread, would harm the potential market of the original. The burden of proof here rests on the copyright owner, who must demonstrate the impact of the infringement on commercial use of the work.
For example, in Sony Corp v. Universal City Studios,[15] the copyright owner, Universal, failed to provide any empirical evidence that the use of Betamax had either reduced their viewership or negatively impacted their business. In Harper & Row, the case regarding President Ford's memoirs, the Supreme Court labeled the fourth factor "the single most important element of fair use" and it has enjoyed some level of primacy in fair use analyses ever since. Yet the Supreme Court's more recent announcement in Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc[6] that "all [four factors] are to be explored, and the results weighed together, in light of the purposes of copyright" has helped modulate this emphasis in interpretation.
In evaluating the fourth factor, courts often consider two kinds of harm to the potential market for the original work. First, courts consider whether the use in question acts as a direct market substitute for the original work. In Campbell, the Supreme Court stated that "when a commercial use amounts to mere duplication of the entirety of the original, it clearly supersedes the object of the original and serves as a market replacement for it, making it likely that cognizable market harm to the original will occur". In one instance, a court ruled that this factor weighed against a defendant who had made unauthorized movie trailers for video retailers, since his trailers acted as direct substitutes for the copyright owner's official trailers.[16]
Second, courts also consider whether potential market harm might exist beyond that of direct substitution, such as in the potential existence of a licensing market. This consideration has weighed against commercial copy shops that make copies of articles in course-packs for college students, when a market already existed for the licensing of course-pack copies.[17]
Courts recognize that certain kinds of market harm do not negate fair use, such as when a parody or negative review impairs the market of the original work. Copyright considerations may not shield a work against adverse criticism.
|
|
3. Amount and substantiality[edit]
Screenshot of Google Image Search results page
The Ninth Circuit has held that the use of thumbnails in image search engines is fair use.
The third factor assesses the amount and substantiality of the copyrighted work that has been used. In general, the less that is used in relation to the whole, the more likely the use will be considered fair.
Using most or all of a work does not bar a finding of fair use. It simply makes the third factor less favorable to the defendant. For instance, in Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. copying entire television programs for private viewing was upheld as fair use, at least when the copying is done for the purposes of time-shifting. In Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corporation, the Ninth Circuit held that copying an entire photo to use as a thumbnail in online search results did not even weigh against fair use, "if the secondary user only copies as much as is necessary for his or her intended use".
However, even the use of a small percentage of a work can make the third factor unfavorable to the defendant, because the "substantiality" of the portion used is considered in addition to the amount used. For instance, in Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises,,[14] the U.S. Supreme Court held that a news article's quotation of fewer than 400 words from President Ford's 200,000-word memoir was sufficient to make the third fair use factor weigh against the defendants, because the portion taken was the "heart of the work." This use was ultimately found not to be fair.[14]
|
|
2. Nature of the copyrighted work[edit]
Signature of J.D. Salinger in 1950
The unpublished nature of J. D. Salinger's letters was a key issue in the court's analysis of the second fair use factor in Salinger v. Random House.
Although the Supreme Court has ruled that the availability of copyright protection should not depend on the artistic quality or merit of a work, fair use analyses consider certain aspects of the work to be relevant, such as whether it is fictional or non-fictional.[10]
To prevent the private ownership of work that rightfully belongs in the public domain, facts and ideas are not protected by copyright—only their particular expression or fixation merits such protection. On the other hand, the social usefulness of freely available information can weigh against the appropriateness of copyright for certain fixations. The Zapruder film of the assassination of President Kennedy, for example, was purchased and copyrighted by Time magazine. Yet its copyright was not upheld, in the name of the public interest, when Time tried to enjoin the reproduction of stills from the film in a history book on the subject in Time Inc v. Bernard Geis Associates.[11]
In the decisions of the Second Circuit in Salinger v. Random House[12] and in New Era Publications Int'l v. Henry Holt & Co,[13] the aspect of whether the copied work has been previously published was considered crucial, assuming the right of the original author to control the circumstances of the publication of his work or preference not to publish at all. However, Judge Pierre N. Leval views this importation of certain aspects of France's droit moral d'artiste (moral rights of the artist) into American copyright law as "bizarre and contradictory" because it sometimes grants greater protection to works that were created for private purposes that have little to do with the public goals of copyright law, than to those works that copyright was initially conceived to protect.[5] This is not to claim that unpublished works, or, more specifically, works not intended for publication, do not deserve legal protection, but that any such protection should come from laws about privacy, rather than laws about copyright. The statutory fair use provision was amended in response to these concerns by adding a final sentence: "The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors."
|
|
1. Purpose and character of the use[edit]
The first factor is "the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes." To justify the use as fair, one must demonstrate how it either advances knowledge or the progress of the arts through the addition of something new.
A key consideration in recent fair use cases is the extent to which the use is transformative. In the 1994 decision Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music Inc,[6] the U.S. Supreme Court held that when the purpose of the use is transformative, this makes the first factor more likely to favor fair use.[7] Before the Campbell decision, federal Judge Pierre Leval argued that transformativeness is central to the fair use analysis in his 1990 article, Toward a Fair Use Standard.[5] Blanch v. Koons is another example of a fair use case that focused on transformativeness. In 2006, Jeff Koons used a photograph taken by commercial photographer Andrea Blanch in a collage painting.[8] He appropriated a central portion of an advertisement she had been commissioned to shoot for a magazine. Koons prevailed in part because his use was found transformative under the first fair use factor.
The Campbell case also addressed the subfactor mentioned in the quotation above, "whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes." In an earlier case, Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., the Supreme Court had stated that "every commercial use of copyrighted material is presumptively . . . unfair." In Campbell, the court clarified that this is not a "hard evidentiary presumption" and that even the tendency that commercial purpose will "weigh against a finding of fair use . . . will vary with the context." The Campbell court held that hip-hop group 2 Live Crew's parody of the song "Oh, Pretty Woman" was fair use, even though the parody was sold for profit. Thus, having a commercial purpose does not preclude a use from being found fair, even though it makes it less likely.[9]
Likewise, the noncommercial purpose of a use makes it more likely to be found a fair use, but it does not make it a fair use automatically.[9] For instance, in L.A. Times v. Free Republic, the court found that the noncommercial use of LA Times content by the Free Republic Web site was not fair use, since it allowed the public to obtain material at no cost that they would otherwise pay for.
Another factor is whether the use fulfills any of the "preamble purposes" also mentioned in the legislation above, as these have been interpreted as paradigmatically "transformative".[citation needed]
It is arguable, given the dominance of a rhetoric of the "transformative" in recent fair use determinations, that the first factor and transformativeness in general have become the most important parts of fair use.
|
|
The four factors of analysis for fair use set forth above derive from the opinion of Joseph Story in Folsom v. Marsh,[1] in which the defendant had copied 353 pages from the plaintiff's 12-volume biography of George Washington in order to produce a separate two-volume work of his own.[4] The court rejected the defendant's fair use defense with the following explanation:
[A] reviewer may fairly cite largely from the original work, if his design be really and truly to use the passages for the purposes of fair and reasonable criticism. On the other hand, it is as clear, that if he thus cites the most important parts of the work, with a view, not to criticize, but to supersede the use of the original work, and substitute the review for it, such a use will be deemed in law a piracy ...
In short, we must often ... look to the nature and objects of the selections made, the quantity and value of the materials used, and the degree in which the use may prejudice the sale, or diminish the profits, or supersede the objects, of the original work.
The statutory fair use factors quoted above come from the Copyright Act of 1976, which is codified at 17 U.S.C. § 107. They were intended by Congress to restate, but not replace, the prior judge-made law. As Judge Pierre N. Leval has written, the statute does not "define or explain [fair use's] contours or objectives." While it "leav[es] open the possibility that other factors may bear on the question, the statute identifies none."[5] That is, courts are entitled to consider other factors in addition to the four statutory factors.
|
|
QMRFair use is a legal doctrine that permits limited use of copyrighted material without acquiring permission from the rights holders. It is one type of limitation and exception to the exclusive rights copyright law grants to the author of a creative work. Examples of fair use in United States copyright law include commentary, search engines, criticism, parody, news reporting, research, teaching, library archiving and scholarship. It provides for the legal, unlicensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test.
The term "fair use" originated in the United States.[1] A similar-sounding principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions but in fact it is more similar in principle to the enumerated exceptions found under civil law systems. Civil law jurisdictions have other limitations and exceptions to copyright.
Fair use is one of the traditional safety valves intended to balance the interests of copyright holders with the public interest in the wider distribution and use of creative works by allowing certain limited uses that might otherwise be considered infringement.
|
|
QMRPrinciples[edit]
Tim Berners-Lee outlined four principles of linked data in his "Linked Data" note of 2006,[2] paraphrased along the following lines:
Use URIs to name (identify) things.
Use HTTP URIs so that these things can be looked up (interpreted, "dereferenced").
Provide useful information about what a name identifies when it's looked up, using open standards such as RDF, SPARQL, etc.
Refer to other things using their HTTP URI-based names when publishing data on the Web.
|
|
QMRHow to Solve It (1945) is a small volume by mathematician George Pólya describing methods of problem solving.[1]
Four principles[edit]
How to Solve It suggests the following steps when solving a mathematical problem:
First, you have to understand the problem.[2]
After understanding, then make a plan.[3]
Carry out the plan.[4]
Look back on your work.[5] How could it be better?
If this technique fails, Pólya advises:[6] "If you can't solve a problem, then there is an easier problem you can solve: find it." Or: "If you cannot solve the proposed problem, try to solve first some related problem. Could you imagine a more accessible related problem?"
First principle: Understand the problem[edit]
"Understand the problem" is often neglected as being obvious and is not even mentioned in many mathematics classes. Yet students are often stymied in their efforts to solve it, simply because they don't understand it fully, or even in part. In order to remedy this oversight, Pólya taught teachers how to prompt each student with appropriate questions,[7] depending on the situation, such as:
What are you asked to find or show?[8]
Can you restate the problem in your own words?
Can you think of a picture or a diagram that might help you understand the problem?
Is there enough information to enable you to find a solution?
Do you understand all the words used in stating the problem?
Do you need to ask a question to get the answer?
The teacher is to select the question with the appropriate level of difficulty for each student to ascertain if each student understands at their own level, moving up or down the list to prompt each student, until each one can respond with something constructive.
Second principle: Devise a plan[edit]
Pólya[9] mentions that there are many reasonable ways to solve problems.[3] The skill at choosing an appropriate strategy is best learned by solving many problems. You will find choosing a strategy increasingly easy. A partial list of strategies is included:
Guess and check[10]
Make an orderly list[11]
Eliminate possibilities[12]
Use symmetry[13]
Consider special cases[14]
Use direct reasoning
Solve an equation[15]
Also suggested:
Look for a pattern[16]
Draw a picture[17]
Solve a simpler problem[18]
Use a model[19]
Work backward[20]
Use a formula[21]
Be creative[22]
Use your head/noggin[23]
Third principle: Carry out the plan[edit]
This step is usually easier than devising the plan.[24] In general, all you need is care and patience, given that you have the necessary skills. Persist with the plan that you have chosen. If it continues not to work discard it and choose another. Don't be misled; this is how mathematics is done, even by professionals.
Fourth principle: Review/extend[edit]
Pólya[25] mentions that much can be gained by taking the time to reflect and look back at what you have done, what worked and what didn't.[26] Doing this will enable you to predict what strategy to use to solve future problems, if these relate to the original problem.
|
|
QMRFundamentals overview[edit]
The basic fundamentals of marksmanship can be described in a number of ways.
Possibly the most succinct version of the principles of marksmanship is that used by the British and Australian Army:
The position and hold must be firm enough to support the weapon.
The firearm must point naturally at the target without physical effort.
Sight alignment must be correct.
The shot must be released and followed through without disturbance to your shooting position.
The US Army similarly breaks marksmanship principles into four fundamentals, however states them more verbosely:
Steady position - Regardless of stance or position, the weapon must be held the same way for each shot and in a manner that will facilitate the least wobble (natural movement of the body as indicated by the sights.) The basic method of firing taught to novice-level shooters and soldiers is the prone supported position; that is, on your stomach with the position supported by another object, usually a sandbag.
Aiming - Sight Alignment (the relationship of the front and rear sight or clear, centered reticle in an optical sight) is most important to accuracy as it helps eliminate angular error. The aligned sights placed on target is Sight Picture. The front sight or reticle should always be positioned in the same spot. These two factors ensures that shots fired, if the other fundamentals are correctly applied, will hit in the same general area. Normally a center hold (center mass of the target) is preferred but other hold points may be used.
Breathing Control - [Not everyone agrees that this is] The least important factor. Normally, the firer should press the trigger during the natural pause after exhalation. The breathing sequence should be as follows: inhale, exhale, hold, squeeze.
Trigger Control - The trigger is the interface between shooter and "machine", and therefore requires careful attention. The shooter must smoothly squeeze the trigger straight back with increasing pressure without attempting to anticipate when the round will fire. Once the grip/hold is achieved, only the index finger of the shooting hand moves during the trigger squeeze. During initial training a marksman should strive for a "surprise break." There is no "wrong" way to place the index finger on the trigger provided that the shooter is able to consistently move the trigger straight rearward. Begin with the pad of the trigger finger and adjust positioning as needed.
|
|
To achieve basic objectives and implement fundamental qualities GAAP has four basic assumptions, four basic principles, and four basic constraints.
Assumptions[edit]
Business Entity: assumes that the business is separate from its owners or other businesses. Revenue and expense should be kept separate from personal expenses.
Going Concern: assumes that the business will be in operation indefinitely. This validates the methods of asset capitalization, depreciation, and amortization. Only when liquidation is certain is this assumption inapplicable. The business will continue to exist in the unforeseeable future.
Monetary Unit principle: assumes a stable currency is going to be the unit of record. The FASB accepts the nominal value of the US Dollar as the monetary unit of record unadjusted for inflation.
The Time-period principle implies that the economic activities of an enterprise can be divided into artificial time periods.
Principles[edit]
Historical cost principle requires companies to account and report assets & liabilities acquisition costs rather than fair market value . This principle provides information that is reliable (removing opportunity to provide subjective and potentially biased market values), but not very relevant. Thus there is a trend to use fair values. Most debts and securities are now reported at market values.
Revenue recognition principle holds that companies should record revenue when earned but not when received. The flow of cash does not have any bearing on the recognition of revenue. This is the essence of accrual basis accounting. Conversely, however, losses must be recognized when their occurrence becomes probable, whether or not it has actually occurred. This comports with the constraint of conservatism, yet brings it into conflict with the constraint of consistency, in that reflecting revenues/gains is inconsistent with the way in which losses are reflected.
Matching principle. Expenses have to be matched with revenues as long as it is reasonable to do so. Expenses are recognized not when the work is performed, or when a product is produced, but when the work or the product actually makes its contribution to revenue. Only if no connection with revenue can be established, cost may be charged as expenses to the current period (e.g. office salaries and other administrative expenses). This principle allows greater evaluation of actual profitability and performance (shows how much was spent to earn revenue). Depreciation and Cost of Goods Sold are good examples of application of this principle.
Full disclosure principle. Amount and kinds of information disclosed should be decided based on trade-off analysis as a larger amount of information costs more to prepare and use. Information disclosed should be enough to make a judgment while keeping costs reasonable. Information is presented in the main body of financial statements, in the notes or as supplementary information
|
|
QMRGenerally Accepted Accounting Principles, also called GAAP or US GAAP, are the generally accepted accounting principles adopted by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). While the SEC has stated that it intends to move from US GAAP to the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), the latter differ considerably from GAAP and progress has been slow and uncertain.[1][2]
|
|
QMRBullard also studied the 300 reports of alien abduction in an attempt to observe the less prominent aspects of the claims.[6] He notes the emergence of four general categories of events that recur regularly, although not as frequently as stereotypical happenings like the medical examination. These four types of events are:[6]
The conference
The tour
The journey
Theophany
|
|
QMRThe terms alien abduction or abduction phenomenon describe "subjectively real memories of being taken secretly against one's will by apparently nonhuman entities and subjected to complex physical and psychological procedures".[1] Such abductions have sometimes been classified as close encounters of the fourth kind. People claiming to have been abducted are usually called "abductees"[2] or "experiencers".
|
|
QMRIn 1994, the Sightings TV program tracked down and interviewed various principals involved in the incident. Nearly all expressed the opinion that they were dealing with a high-technology extraterrestrial craft.[2]
The pilot of the first jet interceptor, Yaddi Nazeri (above in the article, the first pilot is stated as 'Captain Mohammad Reza Azizkhani'), estimated that the UFO was traveling somewhere between two and three thousand miles per hour. He said that the object "...was beyond my speed and power. The [later] F-4... also could not catch up to the object. That's when I thought, this is a UFO." Nazeri added that "...no country had this type of flying object, so I was thinking, this craft is from another planet."
The second F-4 pilot, General Parviz Jafari, said that after trying to fire a missile and failing, they feared for their lives and tried to eject, but the eject button also malfunctioned.[3] At a Washington D.C. press conference on 12 November 2007, Jafari added details that the main object emitted four objects, one that headed towards him and later returned to the main object a short while later, one which he tried unsuccessfully to fire on, another which followed him back, and one which landed on the desert floor and glowed. Following his prepared statement at the press conference, Jafari was asked if he believed he had encountered an alien spacecraft and Pirouzi said he was quite certain that he had. (see below for further details and references)
Tehran
|
|
QMRAccording to some conspiracy theorists, during the military investigation of green fireballs in New Mexico, UFOs were photographed by a tracking camera over White Sands Proving Grounds on April 27, 1949. They claim that the final report in 1951 on the green fireball investigation claimed there was insufficient data to determine anything. Conspiracy theorists claim that documents later uncoveredby Dr. Bruce Maccabee indicate that triangulation was accomplished. The conspiracy theorists also claim that the data reduction and photographs showed four objects about 30 feet in diameter flying in formation at high speed at an altitude of about 30 miles. According to conspiracy theorists, Maccabee says this result was apparently suppressed from the final report.[54]
On January 22, 1958, when NICAP director Donald Keyhoe appeared on CBS television, his statements on UFOs were pre-censored by the Air Force. During the show when Keyhoe tried to depart from the censored script to "reveal something that has never been disclosed before," CBS cut the sound, later stating Keyhoe was about to violate "predetermined security standards" and about to say something he wasn't "authorized to release." Conspiracy theorists claim that what Keyhoe was about to reveal were four publicly unknown military studies concluding UFOs were interplanetary (including the 1948 Project Sign Estimate of the Situation and Blue Book's 1952 engineering analysis of UFO motion). (Good, 286–287; Dolan 293–295)[15][25]
|
|
QMRTaylor's scientific management consisted of four principles:
First. They develop a science for each element of a man's work, which replaces the old rule-of-thumb method.
Second. They scientifically select and then train, teach, and develop the workman, whereas in the past he chose his own work and trained himself as best he could.
Third. They heartily cooperate with the men so as to ensure all of the work being done in accordance with the principles of the science which has been developed.
Fourth. There is an almost equal division of the work and the responsibility between the management and the workmen. The management take over all work for which they are better fitted than the workmen, while in the past almost all of the work and the greater part of the responsibility were thrown upon the men.
|
|
QMRUnder an Agile Business Management model, agile techniques, practices, principles and values are expressed across four domains.[104]
Integrated customer engagement - to embed customers within any delivery process to share accountability for product/service delivery.
Facilitation-based management - adopting agile management models, like the role of Scrum Master, to facilitate the day-to-day operation of teams.
Agile work practices - adopting specific iterative and incremental work practices such as Scrum, Kanban, Test-Driven Development or Feature-Driven Development across all business functions (from Sales, Human Resources, Finance[105] and Marketing).
An enabling organisational structure - with a focus on staff engagement, personal autonomy and outcomes based governance.
An education model the blends agile practices and philosophies to create micro-schools that emphasize collaborative culture creation and self-directed learning.
|
|
QMR1994-09 Warrenton Sighting Warrenton South Africa A farmer claimed to have made repeated observations of a noisy, nighttime craft travelling at great speeds, besides what he described as a 'mother ship'. The craft's noise was compared to the sound of a helicopter or Volkswagen Beetle engine. The farmer's general claims were supported by four independent observers
|
|
QMR1973-10-17 Eglin Air Force Base Sighting Florida United States An unidentified object was tracked by a Duke Field radar unit during the same time period, and within the same area, that 10 to 15 people observed four strange objects flying in formation between Milton, Florida, and Crestview, Florida, along Interstate 10, according to Eglin officials. Reports from the base indicated that a bright glowing ball of light could be seen travelling parallel with an Air Force C-130 aircraft but at a much higher altitude.
|
|
QMR1967-08-29 Close encounter of Cussac outside Cussac, Auvergne France A young brother and sister claimed to have witnessed a brilliant sphere and four small black occupants while herding cattle outside their village.
|
|
QMR1959-06-26/27 Father William Booth Gill sighting Boianai, Territory of Papua and New Guinea Australia Missionary and many natives saw several UFOs, one of them seeming to be repaired by four human-like occupants; witnesses and aliens waved at each other. The case was investigated by J. A. Hynek and accompanied by other sightings.
|
|
QMR1952-07-16 1952 Salem, Massachusetts UFO incident Coast Guard Air Station Salem United States Coast Guard photographer Shell Alpert took a photograph of four roughly elliptical blobs of light in formation through the window of his photographic laboratory. A Coast Guard press release described the lights as "objects", however Seaman Alpert subsequently issued a statement saying, "I cannot in all honesty say that I saw objects or aircraft, merely some manner of lights.
|
|
this is the most famous ufo sighting
|
|
QMRAt about 18:55 PST (19:55 MST), a man reported seeing a V-shaped object above Henderson, Nevada. He said it was about the "size of a 747", sounded like "rushing wind",[5] and had six lights on its leading edge. The lights reportedly traversed northwest to the southeast.
An unidentified former police officer from Paulden, Arizona is claimed to have been the next person to report a sighting after leaving his house at about 20:15 MST. As he was driving north, he allegedly saw a cluster of reddish or orange lights in the sky, comprising four lights together and a fifth light trailing them. Each of the individual lights in the formation appeared to the witness to consist of two separate point sources of orange light. He returned home and through binoculars watched the lights until they disappeared south over the horizon. The four lights close together are the quadrant. The fifth is the ultra transcendent fifth.Dr Bruce Maccabee did an extensive triangulation of the four videotapes, determining that the objects were near or over the Goldwater Proving Grounds.[28] Page 5 of Dr. Maccabee's analysis refers to Bill Hamilton and Tom King's sighting position at Steve Blonder's home. Blonder has worked with Dr. Maccabee to fully include his sighting position in the triangulation report. Maccabee has also refined three other sighting positions and lines of sight in 2012.[29]
There are only four videos of the event
|
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment