Definition of an Activated Complex in Chemistry

An activated complex is an intermediate state that is formed during the conversion of reactants into products. An activated complex is the structure that results in the maximum energy point along the reaction path. The activation energy of a chemical reaction is the difference between the energy of the activated complex and the energy of the reactants. How an Activated Complex Works Consider a chemical reaction between reactants A and B to form products C and D. The reactants must collide with each other and interact in order to form the products. Several factors improve the chances that A and B will encounter each other, including increased temperature, increased concentration of reactants, or adding a catalyst. In a reaction with an activated complex, A and B form the complex A-B. The complex only forms if sufficient energy (the activation energy) is present. The energy of the activated complex is higher than that of either the reactants or products, which makes the activated complex unstable and temporary. If there isnt enough energy for the activated complex to form the products, it eventually breaks apart into the reactants. If enough energy is available, the products form. Activated Complex Versus Transition State Some textbooks use the terms transition state and activated complex interchangeably, but they mean different things. The transition state refers only to the highest potential energy of the atoms participating in a chemical reaction. The activated complex covers a range of atom configurations that atoms form on their way from reactant to products. In other words, the transition state is the one molecular configuration that occurs at the peak of the energy diagram of the reaction. The activated complex may be present at any point near the transition state.

Frederick Douglass and Malcolm X Comparison Essay - 640 Words

Frederick Douglass and Malcolm X Comparison Essay Nneoma Okeoma Sept. 28, 2011 2a Frederick Douglass and Malcolm X Comparison Essay Draft 1 Can one think undergoing suffrage of unjust slavery and being held in a penitentiary be compared? In the excerpt of Frederick Douglass (Learning to Read and Write) and in Malcolm X (Learning to Read): both dealt with the oppression that the white race as brought to them. Douglass lists the ways which he learns how to read and write. He discusses how everyone is vulnerable to corruption under slavery. In the excerpt of Malcolm he tells the reader how he first started reading and he describes how the white man has always had the upper-hand when it comes to non-white people. Frederick†¦show more content†¦Douglass would ask the whites boys and cram in private. Malcolm X uses cause and effect learning process because he wanted to emulate, and then surpass his acquaintance Bimbi. In result he received the motivation to do so. Frederick uses exemplification on the other hand to describe those injustices that occur in his time of slavery. Both uses of organization were very m uch similar on how they went about gaining their education. The subject matter of both excerpts can be easily compared. It seems like Malcolm X went through a lesser version of what Frederick went through. Both writers access to a sense of freedom when they began learning how to read and write. It is obvious that Malcolm would spend a portion of his excerpt talking about the time he spent in jail while Douglass would talk about the burdens of slavery. Learning how to read and write was like a forbidden apple to both writers. So getting that first bite opened their eyes to all the things around them that the whites tried to conceal. Frederick Douglass had spent his early years in slavery and the harsh conditions of slavery cannot in be compared to jail, where everyone (black or white) is treated like a criminal. Both writers, Malcolm X and Frederick Douglass both use similar yet different subject matters in their excerpts. Malcolm X and Frederick Douglass both used elements of style in Learning How to Read and Write and Learning how to Read that could be compared and contrasted. ThisShow MoreRelatedThe History of African-Americans to Attain Equality and Civil Rights2623 Words   |  11 Pages(Carson, 1993, p. 7). Civil Rights A Definition In simple words, civil rights are the rights that the inhabitants of a nation/country have by law. This term cant be compared with the political rights due to its broader meaning. It also has no comparison with natural rights because civil rights enjoy both legal and philosophical basis. As far as the United States of America is concerned, there the civil rights are usually regarded as specific rights guaranteed in the Constitution: freedom of religionRead MoreOne Significant Change That Has Occurred in the World Between 1900 and 2005. Explain the Impact This Change Has Made on Our Lives and Why It Is an Important Change.163893 Words   |  656 PagesPHILADELPHIA Temple University Press 1601 North Broad Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19122 www.temple.edu/tempress Copyright  © 2010 by Temple University All rights reserved Published 2010 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Essays on twentieth century history / edited by Michael Peter Adas for the American Historical Association. p. cm.—(Critical perspectives on the past) Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-1-4399-0269-1 (cloth : alk. paper)—ISBN 978-1-4399-0270-7

Defining Marriage Free Essays

Defining Marriage Words are a part of everyday life. Without them people would have a very hard time conveying a message or showing their feelings to the people around them. Words also provide the groundwork on how we interpret what is expectable and what is not. We will write a custom essay sample on Defining Marriage or any similar topic only for you Order Now Although only eight letters, the word marriage carries a lot of meaning for millions of people across the world. Depending on who ask, they might also have a definition of what they think marriage means. I myself define a marriage as a formal relationship between a man and a woman that last until death. The Merriam Webster dictionary on the other hand would define marriage as â€Å"the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband and wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law. † On the other hand, thousands of men and women are set out to redefine marriage to also include same sex relationships as well. For myself and I’m sure millions of others across the world they do not think that a simple definition can confine someone from living in a regular recognized marriage like everyone else. How we define a particular word can have lasting effects and for the gay and lesbian community restricting them from the same basic rights that everyday couples take advantage of. In this exploratory essay I am dedicated to exploring the contested term â€Å"marriage† between the gay and lesbian community and many other people that have their own definition of marriage as well. Because the age we live in now, the commonly accepted definition of marriage between a man and a woman is keeping tens of thousands of same-sex couples by being federally recognized in a union. So what is marriage and why does it matter how people define it? I first started with Peter Pothan who wrote an article called â€Å"The Christian Concept of Marriage†. Pothan is a theological teacher and is currently the Assistant Director of the Distance Learning Department of Southern Asia Bible College in Bangalore. He wastes no time clearly stating that he gets the definition of marriage from the bible. By referencing different parts of the Bible he is able to define what a Christian Marriage is and additional context as well. The first section that he references from the Bible is in Genesis 2:24. It states, â€Å"Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh. † By this Pathan concludes that a Marriage is between one man and one woman. Although he breaks the verse down into four parts, for this exploratory essay I want to focus the marriage portion on which I am better trying to understand. During Gods initial creation he only created one wife for Adam. Pothan uses this as a backbone that it is not only a relationship between a man and a woman, but it is also a monogamous relationship that must be maintained as well. Additionally, he uses biblical context to further go to say that marriage is only permanent as long as life last. Overall, Peter Pothan does not try to impose this Christian definition of marriage onto anyone, but merely uses evidence from the Bible to extract the definition of marriage. Several times during the article he consistently uses the Christian definition of marriage evoking that he is clearly not trying to impose a singular definition for the word. As a Christian myself I did find how he defined marriage very persuasive. He put very little opinion into interpreting what the Bible was saying and just tried to state the facts. I feel that most Christians would have a hard time disagreeing with what Pothan has to say. I also like he was not trying to impose the definition on anyone. Several times throughout the article he consistently use â€Å"Christian Marriage†. By this I felt that he clearly recognized that there is a dispute between what the definition of marriage truly is. On the other hand, I can also see one big hole is this definition. Although the Bible is very widely used and accepted across the world not everyone is a Christian. Many of those who are not of the Christians faith can easily discredit this definition. Just like many words over time they can slowly evolve and continue to mean more things. It would only make sense to some that the definition of marriage would do the same as well. Many gays and lesbians would also clearly have a hard time accepting this as a definition of marriage. To them this would imply that they are not capable of leaving their mothers and fathers and cleaving to their partner. Overall, I am still very much caught in the crossfire of what marriage should or should not include. By going with the Christian definition of marriage I am essentially supporting the idea of taking away freedoms that many same-sex couple are not able to enjoy like regular couples. This I have a hard time accepting. My next article, â€Å"GOP’s Rob Portman announces support for same-sex marriage† by Matthew DeLuca is on the opposite end of the spectrum when it views the definition of marriage. Matthey Deluca, a writer for NBC News writes about Rob Portman’s view on marriage. The Ohio Senator Portman’s once hard stance that marriage is defined as a between a man and a women now has a change of views. At one point he even supported the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, which limits marriage specifically to one man and one woman. In this article, the Ohio Senator states that â€Å"I have come to believe that if two people are prepared to make a lifetime commitment to love and care for each other in good times and in bad, the government shouldn’t deny them the opportunity to get married. † He describes his change of views based on his 21-year-old son. In a talk with his son in 2011, his son, Will, told his father that he was gay. Portman not only said that his change of heart was due to his son, but also his Christian faith. He says the message of love and compassion from the Bible is also what swayed him to change his mind on this particular issue. This article shows how the definition of marriage can be based on equal rights that many feel everyone should have. As a result, the definition of marriage would have to be extended. Looking at this article, I feel somewhat drawn into Senator Portman’s view of marriage and how the definition should evolve to reflect the culture of America. It is more than just about a definition, but a way to make everyone equal under the law. With the way marriage is right now that is not possible. Same-sex couples that want to take the next step to a recognized marriage are not given the same rights that others couples receive. Portman, a Christian like myself, did choose to take a different angle on how he looks at the Bible. That just goes to show that there are people that are Christians that also support same-sex marriages and essentially want to change the definition of marriage to reflect a greater assortment of couples wanted to seek a civil union. Although I do understand where Senator is coming from I can’t say I fully agree that you can just change the definition of a word because of personal experience that was experienced. My last source I chose was an article called â€Å"Same-Sex Marriage and Equality† by Reginald William. This scholarly source was published on December 21, 2010. Williams is an affiliate of Bakersfield College that contests the views that many have that same-sex marriage is not an equal rights issue. I came across this article using the University of Oklahoma online library. William talks about several individuals and their views in particular that same-sex marriage is a not an equality issue. He describes that many claim this because both heterosexuals and homosexuals are not allowed to get married to the same gender. They are on the other hand â€Å"both† allowed to marry someone of the opposite sex. Williams describes this idea as a basis for many that say this is not an equality issue. William on the other hand disagrees and fully thinks this is still very much about the lack of equality and supports same-sex marriage. Throughout his article he goes into painstaking detail to support his claim. In short, he says although the same rights are available to everyone, the rights available are only truly for heterosexuals couples. Although his claim is somewhat hard to grasp, I feel he overall makes some very important points that support the fact that there is a lack a social equality for same-sex couples. The question that is of real concern though is should this constitute us to redefine the term marriage so that same-sex couples can get married and be federally recognized. I have definitely learned that the definition of marriage matters greatly to the people you ask and it is more than a word that is used in a sentence. It not only has a strong definition that lasted through time, but as of right now is keeping many same-sex couples from being able to be apart of a civil union recognized by our government. Reviewing all of these sources and really letting the point the writers have sink in has made me consider many thoughts that I have not considered before. Although I do strongly believe that the definition of marriage should not change, I do feel that the people affected by the definition of marriage, such as same-sex couples, should have the same rights as a regular marriage if they choose. To me this is not about definitions at all by equal rights. Although I am sure many same-sex couples would like to be included in the definition of marriage, what they really want is to have the same benefits in their relationship as a heterosexual couple does. Even though many states have already started this journey for same-sex couples they are still far from putting them on the same playing field as a traditional definition of marriage and the rights they receive at the federal level. Work Cited Williams, Reginald. â€Å"Same-Sex Marriage and Equality. † Ethical Theory and Moral Practice14. 5 (2011): 589-95. Web. DeLuca, Matthew. â€Å"GOP’s Rob Portman Announces Support for Same-sex Marriage. † NBCNews. N. p. , 15 Mar. 2013. Web. 21 Mar. 2013. Pothan, Peters S. â€Å"The Christian Concept of Marriage. † 2miles. org. N. p. , Sept. 2009. Web. 21Mar. 2013. How to cite Defining Marriage, Papers

Rabies Essay Example For Students

Rabies Essay RabiesRabies is an infectious disease of animals which is a member of a group ofviruses constituting the family Rhabdoviridae. The virus particle is covered ina fatty membrane, is bullet-shaped, 70 by 180 nanometres and contains a singlehelical strand of ribonucleic acid (RNA). Although rabies is usually spread among domestic dogs and wild carnivorousanimals, all warm-blooded animals are susceptible to infection. The virus isoften present in the salivary glands of infected animals, referred to as rabid,and is excreted in the saliva. The bite of the infected animal easilyintroduces the virus into a fresh wound. In humans, rabies is not usually spreadfrom man to man, rather the majority of infections occur from rabid dogs. Aftera person has been inoculated, the virus enters small nerve ends around the siteof the bite, and slowly travels up the nerve to reach the central nervous system(CNS) where it reproduces itself, and will then travel down nerves to thesalivary glands and replicate further. The time it takes to do this depends onthe length of the nerve it must travel a bite on the foot will have a muchlengthier incubation period than a facial bite would. This period may last fromtwo weeks to six months, and often the original wound will have healed and be enforgotten by the time symptoms begin to occur. Symptoms in humans present themselves in one of two forms: furious rabies, or dumb rabies. The former is called such because of the severe nature and rangeof the symptoms. The virus, upon reaching the CNS will present the person withheadache, fever, irritability, restlessness and anxiety. Progression may occuron to muscle pains, excessive salivation, and vomiting. After a few days or upto a week the person may go through a stage of excitement, and be afflicted withpainful muscle spasms which are sometimes set off by swallowing of saliva orwater. Because of this the afflicted will drool and learn to fear water, whichis why rabies in humans was sometimes called Hydrophobia. The patients are alsoextremely sensitive to air or drafts blown on their face. The stage lasts onlyfews days before the onset of a coma, then death. Dumb rabies begins similarlyto furious rabies, but instead of symptoms progressing to excitement, a steadyretreat and quiet downhill state occurs. This may be accompani ed with paralysisbefore death. Rabies diagnosis in this type of cases can be missed. Unfortunately with both furious and dumb rabies, once the disease has taken holdclinically, rapid and relentless progression to invariable death occurs despiteall known treatments. Treatment for the recently infected would include washing the wound with soap,detergent, and water. Then an anti-rabies serum can be administered to humans. Alternative to the serum, an effective and intensive treatment after infectioncan be obtained through the use of a killed virus vaccine, because of theunusually long incubation period. The vaccine, a Human Diploid Cell Vaccine(HDCV) is grown in human fibroblasts (the principal nonmotile cells ofconnective tissue) and is quite safe for human use. When used, the vaccine diddramatically cut the rabies death toll. Previous killed virus vaccines, whichhad been made from infected neural tissue, were not completely effective atimmunisation and had caused adverse side effects. Since contact with wild animals is the main source of infection for humans andtheir pets, avoidance of any direct contact with these animals reduces the riskof being bitten quite dramatically. Raccoons that are wandering in the daylighthours, or any animal that seems friendly should be avoided as well. Otherhigh-risk animals include skunks, foxes, jackals, wolves, as well as an oddassociation with bats. .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba , .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba .postImageUrl , .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba .centered-text-area { min-height: 80px; position: relative; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba , .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba:hover , .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba:visited , .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba:active { border:0!important; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba .clearfix:after { content: ""; display: table; clear: both; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba { display: block; transition: background-color 250ms; webkit-transition: background-color 250ms; width: 100%; opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #95A5A6; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba:active , .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba:hover { opacity: 1; transition: opacity 250ms; webkit-transition: opacity 250ms; background-color: #2C3E50; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba .centered-text-area { width: 100%; position: relative ; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba .ctaText { border-bottom: 0 solid #fff; color: #2980B9; font-size: 16px; font-weight: bold; margin: 0; padding: 0; text-decoration: underline; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba .postTitle { color: #FFFFFF; font-size: 16px; font-weight: 600; margin: 0; padding: 0; width: 100%; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba .ctaButton { background-color: #7F8C8D!important; color: #2980B9; border: none; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: none; font-size: 14px; font-weight: bold; line-height: 26px; moz-border-radius: 3px; text-align: center; text-decoration: none; text-shadow: none; width: 80px; min-height: 80px; background: url(https://artscolumbia.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts/assets/images/simple-arrow.png)no-repeat; position: absolute; right: 0; top: 0; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba:hover .ctaButton { background-color: #34495E!important; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba .centered-text { display: table; height: 80px; padding-left : 18px; top: 0; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba-content { display: table-cell; margin: 0; padding: 0; padding-right: 108px; position: relative; vertical-align: middle; width: 100%; } .u44fa7f1df8a0dbdeaba52b82166195ba:after { content: ""; display: block; clear: both; } READ: Nelson Mandela Essay