text:
Q: "I turned in a valid claim and my insurer won't pay me the limits that I have on my policy. What's going on?"
A: We get this type of question a lot. The limits shown on your policy are simply that -- an upper limit that is the maximum available to you for a covered claim.
But being paid the maximum is rarely automatic. Even though it is your policy, and you've paid your premiums faithfully, you still have the responsibility to document the value of your claim. It's not at all unusual for the value of a claim to be below a policy's limits.
Wednesday, February 13, 2013
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)


text: Just hours ago, iPhone OS 3.0 was unleashed onto the App Store with prices starting at USD 9.99$. Packed with many great 'new' features, the software is bound to stay a top download until current Touch and iPhone users have finished the update cycle or upgraded to newer hardware. Spotlight, cut/copy/paste, landscape editing, bluetooth, MMS, voice memo, iTunes account managing/redeeming, etc. – all are great reasons to update to a new point release, however, Apple have only really taken the blinders from the platform rather than added anything to our beloved devices.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Madonna could not hold back her tears at her concert in Stockholm, Sweden, as she stopped the show to pay tribute to the victims of the Paris attacks and their families.
At least 129 people were killed and more than 350 were wounded in ISIS terrorist shootings and suicide bombings in the French capital on Friday. The 57-year-old Queen of Pop performed 13 songs before speaking about the tragedies and delivering a powerful message about tolerance.
"Actually I don't need my guitar for this 'cause it's been very hard for me to get through this show up to this point and not forget about what happened last night, so I need to take this moment to acknowledge the tragedy, the tragic killings, assassinations and the senseless endings of precious life that occurred last night in Paris," Madonna said, as seen in a YouTube video posted on Saturday by her manager, Guy Oseary.
U.S. & World
"It's been really hard, actually to get through the show because in many ways, I feel, I feel torn. Like, why am I up here dancing and having fun when people are crying over the loss of their loved ones," she said, tearfully. "However, that is exactly what these people want to do. They want to shut us up. They want to silence us. And we won't let them."
She was met with cheers across the packed Tele 2 Arena.
"Tonight's show was difficult but there was so much love in this arena it made me feel like we were turning darkness into light," she said on Instagram.
WATCH: "SNL" pays tribute to people of Paris after attacks, Cecily Strong delivers powerful message and speaks French
"We will never let them!" she said. "Because there is power in unity and I do believe that as much chaos and pain and senseless violence and terrorism that occurs around this world, not just in Paris, as much as that that does occur, there is more goodness in this world. We are here to prove it."
"I was gonna cancel my show tonight but then I thought to myself, 'Why should I give that to them? Why should I allow them to stop me and to stop us from enjoying freedom?'" Madonna said.
Two U2 concerts set to take place over the weekend were canceled. Bono and his bandmates were seen laying flowers on a makeshift memorial on a pavement in the city on Saturday. Foo Fighters canceled the remainder of their current tour, which included a stop in Paris.
This marked Madonna's first concert on her Rebel Heart tour since the attacks. She has a scheduled show in Paris on Dec. 9.
"All of the places where people were killed were places where people were having fun, people were enjoying themselves, eating in restaurants, dancing, singing, watching a soccer match" she told the crowd. "These are freedoms that we take for granted of course and we must not but they're freedoms that we deserve, we work hard and we deserve to have fun and there is no one in this world that should have the right to stop us from doing what we love!"
WATCH: Geraldo Rivera's daughter among Paris attacks survivors, dad gets emotional reporting about and talking to her on TV
About 89 of the victims were gunned down at a concert by the American band Eagles for Death Metal. The musicians survived, while the group's merchandise manager, a 36-year-old man named Nick Alexander, was among those killed.
His girlfriend, Polina Buckley, posted tributes to him on social media.
"Yes, there are people who have no respect for human life and there are people that do atrocious, degrading and unforgivable things to other human beings but we will never ever, ever change this world that we live in if we do not change ourselves, if we do not change the way that we treat one another on a daily basis," Madonna said.
"Only love will change the world," she said. "But it's very hard to love unconditionally and it's very hard to love that which we do not understand or that which is different than we are. But we have to or this will go on and on forever."
She then had the audience observe a moment of silence to "say a prayer for the victims who died last night in Paris." Coldplay did the same thing at a shortened concert in Los Angeles on Friday.
"So, here's what I know how to do," she said. "And I hope that you will join we and that we will all sing this prayer together."
Madonna then launched into one of the most emotional renditions of her 1989 hit "Like a Prayer."


text:
In 1960, most everyone who cared about such things knew what a space station was supposed to look like: it would take the form of a revolving wheel. The design, first portrayed in detail by Austrian Hermann Noordung in 1928, was popularized in the United States after the Second World War by Wernher von Braun in the pages of Collier's magazine and in a series of Disneyland "Tomorrowland" programs.
Wheel-shaped stations would revolve to create acceleration, which the crew on board would feel as gravity. This "artificial gravity" would be strongest at the station's outer rim and non-existent at its hub. Use of artificial gravity led to big station designs: this was because artificial-gravity stations of small radius would generate undesirable effects, such as a noticeable variation in the level of acceleration felt along a standing astronaut's body.
Soon after NASA opened for business on 1 October 1958, Langley Research Center (LaRC) took the lead in U.S. civilian space station development. Not surprisingly, the Hampton, Virginia-based laboratory emphasized wheel-shaped artificial-gravity stations. LaRC engineers built and ground-tested donut-shaped inflatable station modules. Meanwhile, several LaRC engineers developed and patented single-launch "self-deploying" or "erectable" large wheel-shaped station designs.
As LaRC labored toward space stations, the Space Task Group, an independent team of engineers based at LaRC, began work on Mercury, NASA's first manned spacecraft. NASA Headquarters, meanwhile, solicited proposals from industry for a post-Mercury spacecraft it dubbed Apollo. As originally conceived, Apollo was intended primarily as an Earth-orbital spacecraft capable of conveying astronauts to space stations. An Apollo circumlunar mission was a post-1970 goal.
This plan changed dramatically on 25 May 1961, when new President John F. Kennedy called upon NASA to land a man on the moon by 1970. Space station development was back-burnered, and Apollo became NASA's lunar landing spacecraft. After NASA opted for the Lunar-Orbit Rendezvous (LOR) moon landing mode in July 1962, Apollo's functions were split between two spacecraft: the Command and Service Module (CSM), capable of conveying three men from Earth to lunar orbit and back again, and the four-legged Lunar Module (LM), which would carry two men from the CSM in lunar orbit to the moon's forbidding surface and back again.
NASA soon recognized a need for a program that would enable astronauts to bridge the yawning spaceflight skills gap separating Mercury and Apollo. The lone Mercury astronaut could, for example, adjust only his spacecraft's attitude (the direction its nose pointed), not its orbit; the three-man Apollo crews would be called upon to conduct multiple significant orbit-changing maneuvers, including capture into and departure from lunar orbit. Apollo would also require rendezvous and docking maneuvers in lunar orbit and, in the event of docking difficulties, spacewalks between the LM and the CSM.
Initially dubbed Mercury Mark II, the two-man skill-building spacecraft was redesignated Gemini in January 1962. Gemini would partner with Agena, a modified upper stage, to provide its crews with rendezvous and docking experience. Gemini astronauts would also conduct spacewalks and remain in Earth orbit for up to two weeks to enable physicians to certify that Apollo crews could remain healthy for the duration of a lunar voyage. NASA planned for Gemini flights to occur in 1963 and 1964.
NASA tasked McDonnell Aircraft, Mercury prime contractor, with building Gemini. The new spacecraft would comprise two main modules: the Reentry Module bearing the crew and the Adapter Module containing the Orbital Attitude Maneuvering System (OAMS) and solid-propellant deorbit rockets. The latter would be located in the the Retrograde Section, the forward part of the Adapter, up against the Reentry Module heat shield.
As had Mercury and as would Apollo, Gemini would provide its crew with a pure oxygen atmosphere. Unlike Mercury or Apollo, Gemini would feature a jet fighter-style cockpit with forward facing windows and ejection seats. Electrical power would come from fuel cells, which would combine liquid oxygen and liquid hydrogen to produce potable water and electricity. Gemini would reach orbit on a modified U.S. Air Force (USAF) Titan missile. At the end of its mission, the Reentry Module would deploy an inflatable triangular parawing and glide to a controlled land landing on skids.
In the first half of 1961, McDonnell submitted a proposal for a Gemini-based military spacecraft as part of the USAF's Military Test Space Station (MTSS) study. In McDonnell's design, Air Force astronauts would reach a pressurized module attached behind their Gemini spacecraft by opening a hatch above and behind their ejection seats. The hatch would lead through the Gemini Reentry Module heatshield to a bent tunnel passing through the Adapter Module. The military spacecraft would include surveillance cameras and a powerful transtage rocket motor for large orbit changes and fast satellite inspection missions.
High-level uncertainty about the USAF role in manned spaceflight led McDonnell in December 1962 to peddle its Gemini station plans to NASA. The company proposed that the U.S. civilian space agency carry out a low-cost Gemini-based space station program that would include design features it had developed for MTSS. McDonnell argued that
presently programmed launch vehicles capable of placing 20,000 to 200,000 pounds in near earth orbits will be available [in the late 1960s]. Large space station complexes with elaborate facilities and housing large numbers of crewmen will then be technically feasible. However, before undertaking the development of such stations, it is desirable, if not mandatory, to explore at a modest level some of the fundamental design and cost determining operational factors such as, the need for artificial gravity[,]. . .the physiological and psychological effects of long term space operations[,] and appropriate crew tours of duty. The space stations proposed provide. . .early capability to obtain answers to fundamental questions [at] modest cost.
If McDonnell had had its way, Gemini would have become for NASA's eventual large space station what it was already for Apollo. That is, it would have bridged the skills gap between short, weightless missions in small spacecraft and long missions on board large stations resembling, perhaps, LaRC's wheel-shaped artificial-gravity designs.
McDonnell's proposed evolutionary modular station program would include five basic building blocks: the Gemini Transport, which would serve as crew carrier and piloted space tug; the Supply Module; the One-Room Space Station; the Two-Room Space Station; and the Electrical Power Module. To trim costs, the Supply Module and One-Room Space Station would be structurally similar, and the Two-Room Space Station would resemble the Electrical Power Module. In addition, NASA would save money by recovering Gemini Transport Reentry Modules and returning them to McDonnell for refurbishment and reuse.
All these modules would measure 10 feet in maximum diameter, in keeping with the diameter of the Titan-derived rockets that would boost them to Earth orbit. McDonnell assumed two Titan variants for its proposed space station program: the two-stage Gemini Launch Vehicle (GLV) (better known as the Titan II) and the Standard Launch Vehicle (SLV) 624A-C (better known as the Titan III). The latter would comprise a modified two-stage GLV core, twin strap-on solid-propellant booster rockets, and a restartable transtage upper stage.
The GLV, capable of launching 7390 pounds into a 87-by-200-nautical-mile orbit, would loft single spacecraft and modules. The Gemini Transport, Supply Module, One-Room Space Station, and Two-Room Space Station would fall within its capability.
The SLV 624A-C, on the other hand, would be capable of placing 25,280 pounds into a 250-nautical-mile circular orbit or 26,000 pounds into a 100-by-250-nautical-mile orbit. This would permit it to launch module combinations: the Gemini Supply Transport (Gemini Transport plus Supply Module) and the Gemini Transport plus Four-Room Space Station (Two-Room Space Station plus Electrical Power Module).
McDonnell expended considerable in-house time and effort to develop a feasible rendezvous and docking system. The company ultimately settled on having the Gemini Transport "back up" to dock.
Because the Gemini Transport would use the nose-mounted Gemini rendezvous radar, it would first approach with its twin forward-facing windows pointed toward its target. Then, at a distance of 10,000 feet, the co-pilot would unstrap from his seat, twist around in the tight confines of the Gemini Transport cockpit, and open the 27.5-inch-diameter pressure and heatshield hatches above and behind his and the pilot's seats. He would squeeze through a 24.5-inch-diameter opening in the heatshield to enter a 32-inch-diameter tunnel in the Adapter Module. The tunnel would lead to a rear-facing Crew Docking Station.
The pilot, meanwhile, would turn the Gemini Transport end-for-end to point the flat rear of its Adapter Module at the target. The co-pilot would sight the target through a small rear-facing window above the docking control console and then would commence a "semi-manual" final approach employing the OAMS maneuvering thrusters and six docking thrusters. Approach from 10,000 feet would need 10 minutes, McDonnell estimated, during which time the Gemini Transport would slow from a speed of 100 feet per second to zero relative to its target.
McDonnell proposed a "ring-and-fork" docking system. The co-pilot would line up a roughly nine-foot-diameter ring on the rear of the Adapter Module with four equidistantly spaced two-prong forks on the target. The ring would slide along the inner surfaces of the prongs, canceling out any misalignment between spacecraft and target, then would trip latches on the forks to achieve soft docking. Finally, the forks would retract, pulling hatches on the Gemini Transport and its target securely together.
McDonnell outlined a series of increasingly complex Gemini-based space station missions. These would begin in 1965, immediately after the baseline Gemini Program was completed, with a series of three two-man One-Room Space Station missions lasting 30, 45, and 60 days, respectively. The company dubbed this series Program A. It based its development schedule on NASA approval in February 1963.
Astronaut activities on board the One-Room Space Stations would emphasize space medicine, station housekeeping, and science, artificial-gravity, and military experiments. The One-Room Space Stations would use improved Gemini-type fuel cells to make electricity and water and would not remain occupied for long enough to need resupply. They would provide their crews with a pure oxygen atmosphere at a pressure of five pounds per square inch, 548 cubic feet of pressurized volume, and a ceiling height of seven feet. The station's 36 square feet of clear floor space would be covered with velcro so that the astronauts, who would wear velcro slippers, could anchor themselves in weightlessness.
For the 30-day first mission, a GLV would launch a 7390-pound One-Room Space Station into an initial 87-by-200-nautical-mile orbit, then another would launch a Gemini Transport. The latter would dock with the former, then the combination would maneuver to a 200-nautical-mile circular orbit. This approach - making the Gemini Transport responsible for orbit circularization - would help to maximize the GLV's payload capacity. The two astronauts would work on board the One-Room Space Station for 30 days. They then would undock in their Gemini Transport, cast off the aft section of its Adapter Module, and fire its Retrograde rocket motors to decrease its orbital velocity and fall back to Earth. The Gemini Transport Retrograde section would include five retrograde motors; that is, one more than the standard Gemini. Following a fiery atmosphere reentry, the Reenty Module would deploy its parawing and glide to a land landing.
The second One-Room Space Station mission would see early artificial-gravity experiments. McDonnell explained that "artificial gravity operations not only constitute new techniques in themselves, but also interrelate with and tend to modify many of the other required space station functions." A GLV would place its own second stage and the second One-Room Space Station into an initial elliptical orbit. The crew would then arrive in a Gemini Transport and boost the combination into a 200-nautical-mile-high circular operational orbit.
After settling into their new home, the astronauts would detach the GLV second stage and pay out a cable linking it to the One-Room Space Station. Full extension would require between five and six hours, McDonnell estimated. At about 75% of full cable extension, the astronauts would begin cautiously pulsing the One-Room Space Station's thrusters. The end-over-end rotation this would produce would create artificial gravity in the One-Room Space Station and the Gemini Transport. Because the mass of the GLV second stage (5800 pounds) would be less than half that of the Gemini Transport/One-Room Space Station combination (about 14,000 pounds), the center of rotation would be located closer to the Gemini Transport/One-Room Space Station (150 feet) than to the GLV stage (362 feet). To halt the artificial-gravity test, the crew would reverse the cable-extension procedure.
McDonnell described other artificial-gravity experiments that might take place in its proposed program. The most complex would involve a pair of Four-Room Space Stations, each with a Supply Module and two Gemini Supply Transports attached. These would be of nearly equal mass and would be separated by approximately 300 feet of cable. The company proposed methods by which a Gemini Transport could safely dock with or undock from a revolving station and calculated the effects on stable rotation of crew movements within the station over time.
The third and final One-Room Space Station mission, which would occur before or during 1966, would last for 60 days, but would otherwise resemble the first. The crew's two-month orbital stay would pave the way for four men to live for 60 days on board a Two-Room Space Station during the Gemini-based station program's second phase.
McDonnell envisioned that the Two-Room and Four-Room station programs, which it dubbed Program B and Program C, respectively, would both receive preliminary approval in January 1965, and that NASA would in January 1966 choose to fly Program B and Program C in succession or to skip directly to Program C after Program A. If the latter option were selected, McDonnell assumed that NASA would wish to fly a fourth One-Room Space Station in August 1966 to bridge the gap between the third Program A station launched in early 1966 and the Program C station launched in early 1967.
Assuming that NASA opted to fly Program B, however, in mid-1966 a 7390-pound Two-Room Space Station would climb to an elliptical orbit on a GLV. A Gemini Transport with two astronauts on board would then lift off on a GLV, rendezvous and dock with the Two-Room Space Station, and circularize the combination's orbit.
To make way for a second Gemini Transport that would increase the Two-Room Space Station's population to four, the first crew would pioneer a new space station technique. They would extend mooring arms to grip fixtures on their spacecraft, disengage the docking fork latches, and swing their Gemini Transport into alignment with one of two mooring ports on the Two-Room Space Station's sides. The mooring arms would then retract, causing the Gemini Transport's docking ring to latch on four small mooring forks. As with the larger docking forks, these would then retract, pulling the Gemini Transport and Two-Room Space Station firmly together.
Like the One-Room Space Station, the Two-Room Space Station would use fuel cells to make electricity; unlike its predecessor, it would be capable of being resupplied. The third GLV launch of the first Two-Room Space Station mission would place the program's first 7390-pound Supply Module into an elliptical initial orbit. Of its mass, 3992 pounds would comprise supplies and equipment for the Two-Room Space Station. The Supply Module would be the key to making possible launch of the Two-Room Space Station on a GLV; it would permit NASA to place the station into orbit with little experiment equipment on board and with supplies adequate only for two men for 30 days, thereby minimizing its launch mass.
The Supply Module's front end would include four docking forks and a hatch, while its aft end would include a docking ring, a hatch, and a rear-facing Crew Docking Station with window. After the Supply Module reached orbit, a Gemini Transport would lift off to rendezvous and dock with it. The Gemini Transport/Supply Module combination would then rendezvous with the Two-Room Space Station. The co-pilot would guide the Gemini Transport/Supply Module to a docking with the Two-Room Space Station using docking controls in the Supply Module. The astronauts would enter the Two-Room Space Station through the Supply Module hatch, then would extend mooring arms to pivot the Gemini Transport/Supply Module combination to the Two-Room Space Station's second mooring port, on the side opposite the Gemini Transport that delivered the first two crewmembers.
Arrival of a third Gemini Transport at the Two-Room Station's docking port would mark the beginning of the first Two-Room Space Station's final operations. After a brief period during which the Two-Room Space Station would house six astronauts, the first crew would undock in their Gemini Transport and return to Earth. The second crew would subsequently undock from the Supply Module, which would remain attached to the Two-Room Space Station to serve as a "pantry" and to provide additional living and working space. Finally, the third crew would undock from the Two-Room Space Station's docking port and return to Earth.
The advent of the man-rated SLV 624A-C rocket would spell important changes for McDonnell's proposed program. The SLV 624A-C would be powerful enough to launch into a circular 250-nautical-mile-high orbit a payload comprising a Gemini Transport with two astronauts, a Two-Room Space Station without fuel cells and fuel-cell consumables, and a two-room Electrical Power Module with twin solar-array wings and storage batteries. The Two-Room Space Station and Electrical Power Module would be bolted together on the ground to create the Four-Room Space Station, which would be capable of supporting a four-man, one-year mission with 60-day crew stays and partial crew rotation every month.
Deletion of fuel-cell consumables would permit the Four-Room Station to reach orbit fully equipped with experiment apparatus and loaded with supplies adequate to support four men for six months. The SLV 624A-C could also launch a Gemini Transport/Supply Module together. McDonnell dubbed this combination the Gemini Supply Transport. Modifications to the Gemini Transport for its Gemini Supply Transport role would include deletion of the aft-mounted docking ring, docking piloting station, and docking viewport.
Ten GLV-launched Gemini Transports would dock with the Four-Room Space Station. A single SLV 624A-C-launched Gemini Supply Transport would dock bearing life support consumables, food, and other supplies halfway through the Four-Room Space Station's year-long career. The crew would pivot the Gemini Supply Transport to a mooring port. After its Gemini Transport component undocked from it, the Supply Module docking port would become the second docking port for the Four-Room Space Station.
McDonnell gave special attention to the effects of the space environment on astronauts and equipment. Among features of the space environment it examined was the Earth-circling "artificial radiation belt" that the July 1962 Starfish Prime space nuclear test had created. The company acknowledged that little data existed concerning Starfish Prime radiation, but judged nonetheless that the shielding required to limit astronaut radiation exposure to 1.93 rad per day on a One-Room Station in a 200-nautical-mile-high orbit would weigh 1600 pounds. The 1.93 rad per day radiation exposure limit was based on the exposure limits proposed for Apollo lunar missions. The company also suggested a novel (but probably impractical) method for reducing station shielding mass: "personal shielding" for each astronaut, presumably in the form of a garment. This would weigh 160 pounds per crewman.
The company provided detailed cost estimates for its modular station program. If NASA flew Program A, B, and C, the cost would come to $194.2 million for development, $194.3 million for Program A, $185.9 million for Program B, and $462.8 million for Program C. If it flew A and C only, the development cost would remain the same, and the program cost would total $657.1 million.
NASA's Project Gemini saw 10 manned missions launched between March 1965 and November 1966. This made the program almost two years late, if one adhered to McDonnell's optimistic 1962 timeline. Gemini III (Virgil Grissom and John Young, March 23, 1965) was a three-orbit manned test of the new spacecraft. At the end of their mission, Grisssom and Young's Reentry Module lowered on a parachute and splashed down at sea: NASA had abandoned the parawing in mid-1964.
During Gemini IV (James McDivitt and Ed White, 3-7 June 1965), Ed White became the first American to walk in space. His successful simple spacewalk deceived planners, causing them to postpone more complex spacewalks in favor of long-duration and rendezvous and docking missions.
Gemini V (Gordon Cooper and Pete Conrad, 21-29 August 1965) remained in orbit for a week and Gemini VII stayed aloft for two weeks (Frank Borman and Jim Lovell, 4-18 December 1965). Following the loss of its docking target (an unmanned Agena rocket stage) when its Atlas booster malfunctioned, Gemini VI (Wally Schirra and Tom Stafford, 15-16 December 1965) performed rendezvous and proximity operations with Gemini VII.
The Gemini spacecraft docked by sliding its blunt nose into a funnel-shaped sleeve on the front of the Agena, triggering latches. Crew movement between the Gemini cockpit and the outer surface of the Agena was by spacewalk. Gemini VIII (Neil Armstrong and David Scott, 16-17 March 1966) became the first manned spacecraft to perform a docking, but then suffered a perilous OAMS thruster malfunction that forced an emergency landing, scrubbing a planned spacewalk. Gemini IX (Thomas Stafford and Eugene Cernan, 1-11 June 1966) attempted to dock with an ad hoc target vehicle following the loss of its Agena target to an Atlas booster failure, but found its way blocked by a jammed launch shroud. Cernan's attempt to perform a complex spacewalk using a USAF-developed rocket backpack was also less than successful.
Gemini X (John Young and Michael Collins, 18-21 July 1966) docked with an Agena and used its rocket motor to rendezvous with the dead Gemini VIII Agena, thus accomplishing the world's first double rendezvous. The mission also drove home again the unanticipated challenges of walking in space. Gemini missions XI (Pete Conrad and Dick Gordon, 12-15 September 1966) and XII (Jim Lovell and Edwin Aldrin, 11-15 November 1966) each performed rendezvous with an Agena and saw astronauts step outside to perfect new spacewalk techniques. During their spacewalks, Gordon and Aldrin each tethered his Gemini to an Agena to perform artificial-gravity and spacecraft stabilization experiments.
By Gemini's end, NASA had a cadre of astronauts experienced in techniques required for Apollo lunar flights. Meanwhile, Department of Defense and White House interest in a USAF manned space program waxed and waned. In December 1963, a year to the month after McDonnell sought to interest NASA in its Modular Space Station Evolving from Gemini proposal, the Gemini-based USAF Manned Orbiting Laboratory (MOL) program received approval. MOL bore a modest resemblance to McDonnell's 1961 MTSS spacecraft.
Six and a half years later (June 1969), with more than $300 million spent, Defense Secretary Melvin Laird cancelled the project in favor of automated surveillance satellites. Eight MOL astronauts subsequently transferred to NASA and went to work at the Manned Spacecraft Center in Houston. Seven formed the seventh group of NASA astronauts, and one (Albert Crews) became a pilot for the Flight Crew Operations Directorate.
Bellcomm, NASA's Washington, DC-based Apollo and advanced planning contractor, sought to revive the concept of a low-cost Gemini-based space station program in 1968, as NASA's attention turned increasingly toward post-Apollo goals. Bellcomm offered its Gemini-based program not as a bridge to a large station, but as a realistic alternative to NASA's plans. At the time, some in NASA aimed to build a six-to-nine-man station despite clear indications that post-Apollo goals of any kind enjoyed little support from the White House, Congress, and public.
A year later, with the political environment no less inimical, NASA sought funding to develop even larger stations serviced by reusable logistics supply vehicles. NASA's station ambitions still received little support, but the Air Force and Nixon White House became interested in the reusable manned spacecraft concept. This marked the genesis of the Space Shuttle. Eventually, all seven Group 7 astronauts would reach orbit on board Shuttle Orbiters.
Modular Space Station Evolving from Gemini, Report No. 9572, Volume I: Technical Proposal, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, December 15, 1962.
Modular Space Station Evolving from Gemini, Report No. 9572, Volume II: Proposed Program and Available Resources, McDonnell Aircraft Corporation, December 15, 1962.


text:
by Jim C. Hines on Aug 7, 2012 in Nonfiction | 20 comments
By Jim C. Hines
I've read and loved countless books over my lifetime, but few have been as important or influential as the one sitting on my desk as I write this article: the Dungeons and Dragons Players Handbook. (The 3.5 edition, for those of you who must know.) I've been playing this game for close to thirty years, but it's only recently that this book helped to crystalize something that had been bugging me about the fantasy genre.
From Chapter Two: Races—"[T]he promise of power and profit brings together people of all the common races: "humans, dwarves, elves, gnomes, half-elves, half-orcs, and halflings."
Um… call me crazy, but I thought dwarfs—little people—were human.
It's such a common trope in fantasy that many of us—most of us—never even question it. I've played dwarven fighters and paladins and barbarians. The dwarf Darnak was one of my favorite characters in my goblin novels. I wrote a short story about a dwarven bard who carried a granite battle flute.
They were good characters, and good stories. But I cringe now, thinking about what it must be like to be a person with dwarfism, to pick up a fantasy novel and read yet another tale about beer-swilling, axe-swinging, gold-loving warriors with magnificent beards. (The women too, ha-ha, isn't that hilarious?)
Authors don't have the greatest track record when it comes to writing "the other." We create magical negroes and noble savages and countless other stereotypes and clichés. But I'm hard-pressed to think of another example where almost universally, even in the twenty-first century, we write about a group of people with the explicit assumption that they aren't even human. Where we accept that assumption with so little critical discussion.
"But wait," you might argue. "Nobody's trying to offend anyone. But are we supposed to just eliminate such a huge part of our genre for the sake of political correctness?" Or maybe you'll point out that "Just last month a group of little people were threating to organize a 'Hundred Midget March' to protest the casting of full-size actors to play the dwarves in Snow White and the Huntsman, so they obviously don't object to how they're being portrayed!"
I don't claim to read minds, nor would I assume any group shares a single homogenous opinion on any given issue. But how many roles does Hollywood actually offer for smaller actors? Fantasy dwarves. Munchkins. Oompa-Loompas. And now even those roles are going to full-size actors? I can't help but wonder about supply and demand, and the relative dearth of roles for little people, let alone roles that treat them as human beings rather than tropes or spectacles.
I keep coming back to the question of visibility. As a five foot eight white man, I have an unending stream of stories that present people who look like me in a wide range of roles. Which is great for me, but what about the rest of us? What about the parents of a child with dwarfism who look around, trying to find stories that portray someone like their child as a well-rounded, heroic, human character?
It's not that such stories don't exist. Willow comes to mind. While the movie portrayed little people as a separate race (Nelwyns), at least it was a race with variety. A race of people, not clichés and flat stereotypes. It's one of the few stories I can think of where a little person (Warwick Davis) is the hero of the story, and a well-rounded, engaging hero at that.
George R. R. Martin created the character of Tyrion Lannister for his series A Song of Ice and Fire, the basis for HBO's A Game of Thrones. Tyrion was born with dwarfism, and his mother died giving birth to him. He is a fully human character, complex and conflicted, with a full range of motivations and desires.
While other characters may mock and persecute Tyrion for his "deformity," neither the author nor the story itself question his humanity. Indeed, in the HBO special, Tyrion's character has become something of a fan favorite.
Peter Dinklage, who plays Tyrion Lannister, sums things up thusly: "I don't gravitate towards fantasy. I do have a deeper appreciation for it because of Game of Thrones, but I never really was attracted to fantasy because of how most writers depict people my size." (I recommend reading the full piece at http://www.themarysue.com/peter-dinklage-fantasy/.)
It's not that fantasy never acknowledges the existence of little people or treats them as human—and I would love to hear suggestions in the comments—but such portrayals are rare and horribly overshadowed by the fantasy clichés. By Gimli with beer dripping down his beard, or joking about dwarf-tossing. And so many of us as readers and authors accept these portrayals without ever questioning or thinking about them.
As a writer who has committed some of those unthinking portrayals, I believe that needs to change.
More from Jim C. Hines:
Jim C. Hines' latest book is Libriomancer, a modern-day fantasy about a magic-wielding librarian, a hamadryad, a secret society founded by Johannes Gutenberg, a flaming spider, and an enchanted convertible. He's also the author of the Princess series of fairy tale retellings as well as the humorous Goblin Quest trilogy. His short fiction has appeared in more than 40 magazines and anthologies. In his free time, he practices Sanchin-Ryu karate, fights a losing battle against housework entropy, and attempts ridiculous cover poses on the internet. Online, he can be found at http://www.jimchines.com.
This is Jim's second appearance in Apex Magazine. His essay in issue 32 titled "Writing About Rape" stands as our most popular nonfiction feature to date.
Interesting article and very important points made, thank you!
Something else that's related – the portrayal of dwarves in Tolkien's works was partially based on… medieval European stereotypes about Jews. (Here's an interesting blog post which also links to a research paper.) So at least some of the dehumanization comes from that… There are commonalities in the most unexpected places – 'Jews have beards, even the women' is a stereotype I've come across IRL here in Eastern Europe… yes, there are people who think this is funny.
But I'm not saying that all of the dehumanization stems from the ethnic-minority connection, I'm not trying to derail the discussion. I just thought this would be interesting to note.
This letter written by Tolkien to his German publishers (who asked him whether he had Jewish ancestry) in 1938 suggests he did not have any anti-semitic tendencies.
A few key sentences – "But if I am to understand that you are enquiring whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people." and "I … regard my German name with pride … however… if impertinent and irrelevant inquiries of this sort are to become the rule in matters of literature, then the time is not far distant when a German name will no longer be a source of pride."
A lot to think about there. I think you're right and it is something that may need to change. What confounds things even more, going back to your D&D 3.5 reference, is that the fantasy race known as Dwarves isn't even that small as these things go. There's a good chance Tordek stands just as tall as you do.
Prezzey – that's interesting. I'm currently neck-deep in new-book freakout, but I'm bookmarking that blog post for further reading. Thanks!
I always assumed the dwarves in fantasy were patterned off the creatures of Germanic folklore/mythology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwarf_(Germanic_mythology)), who lived in mountains and mined, rather than actual little people, a kind of fairy folk, like the original elves and whatnot. I know the elves of the 'original' stories were only a few inches tall (and thereby not to be confused with short people, or indeed with people at all), and would be interested in knowing if Dwarves had a similar progression from miniature to how they're portrayed now.
Of course, be that as it may, it does beg the question of whether the portrayal of dwarves in fantasy needs an update.
I've never heard the Jew stereotype (I'm not a huge Tolkein scholar). I find it a rather disturbing one.
Strider – And I'm not saying I have an answer for that question … but I do think it's a question we should be asking and thinking about.
I think the way GRRM dealt with it is important and valuable. I am using real "little people" in my epic fantasy. But I have very close friends who are dwarfs. I know them well and we have discussed many of their issues. I have seen it from the inside. They don't mind magical "dwarves." In fact, they actually liked that positive image and the heroism and wished more people accepted them in similar fashion. Now, I don't pretend my friends speak for all dwarves but I can say that they had a good sense of humor and they learned to win people over with their kindness, charm and enthusiasm for life. I think that you make some valid points but I don't necessarily think that makes writing "magical dwarves" of fantasy tradition wrong, because I think they are entirely different. They are an entire race, not little humans of our race. They have an entirely different culture, not our culture seen from a different height level. And, if written well, I really think there's a clear distinction. Do they deal with some of the same issues? yes. But in some ways that actually makes them able to speak into normal sized people's lives about issues they might otherwise not realize or think about and get them thinking and maybe even caring more. I've see the LOTR films have that impact already. It's one of the ways our speculative genres can speak into real life that stories set too close to home often cannot. I do think writers should be sensitive in portrayals, but I don't think throwing the baby out with the bath water is required.
It seems a bit odd to mention Willow as a human portrayal but not hobbits.
I'm not sure how many of the features of the dwarves from Scandinavian/Germanic mythology can be directly attributed to stereotypes of Jews, though it seems the two became (rather unfortunately) identified later on in French/German/Italian fairy tales. "Rumpelstiltskin", for instance, features a small, bearded money-changer with an unpronounceable name who plans to commit blood libel (see "Granny Rumple" by Jane Yolen).
I wish to mention Tad Williams. He always did a great job I think with little people… Memory, Sorrow and Thorn, War of Flowers, Shadowmarch… you can find many, many well-rounded short/little characters in those works, who are never just helpful secondary characters, but heroes of their own stories.
IMO, you started with a problematic premise:
"Um… call me crazy, but I thought dwarfs—little people—were human."
Growing up I had a classmate with dwarfism. She was very clear that she was NOT a dwarf—a make-believe creature—she was a _human being_. She was a little person and she had dwarfism. She wasn't a dwarf.
I've only met three little people, but they immediately corrected people who referred to them as dwarves.
Maybe they were unusual, or maybe the preferences of those with dwarfism has changed. I don't know.
But with their preferences in mind, I find it far more problematic to see human beings with dwarfism referred to as dwarves than to see small, specifically non-human magical beings referred to that way.
Agreed. Using a noun to describe a minority is generally dehumanising; using "[adjective] people"/"people with [noun]" is far better. You can immediately see this if you compare the sentences "There were a lot of black people at the concert" with "there were a lot of blacks at the concert." Not sure why one would be mentioning it at all, but excusing that, the second is obviously ew.
Tolkien's "dwarfs" are specifically not human. The silmarillion explains their origins and they are in no way intended to be humans with dwarfism. They are intended to be a mythical race.
Fabulous article, Jim! As somebody who actually IS a dwarf — I don't have acondroplagia, but I am legally a "Dwarf" at 4'6″ in height — I've thought about the stereotypes with dwarves in SF/fantasy for years. Then again, I like to think outside the box with all character-types, in my own writing. And yeah, it's difficult; we've had so many decades of "this is what a dwarf's like" thrown at us, so sitting back and trying to ponder the subject I automatically come up with the stereotype first, that I want to quash.
Unfortunately, people don't distinguish between "Tolkien-esque dwarf," and "dwarf as in person with dwarfism," for some reason. Yeah, Tolkien specifically made his dwarves non-human; they're made of stone for crying out loud. Buuut, people just don't distinguish between the things. I actually run into folks in World of Warcraft who associate "midgets" with gnomes, and who can't tell the difference between gnomes and dwarves. In writing, I've occasionally seen that too. Lumping little peoples together seems to be a thing in a lot of fantasy writing, and it's too bad because gnomes, pixies, dwarves, elves — originally in lore they were little people — brownies, etc are all very different critters and all have very special histories and ways. So I applaud anyone who gets that, and who tries to do something about it.
Your problem here is that you're conflating two separate things that have the same name.
No, high-fantasy dwarves are not the same as humans of small stature. To claim that one is a portrayal of the other is as fatuous as claiming that the thing your toes grow out of is a precise unit of measure.
Catchersrule is right, people don't make the distinction between fantasy Dwarves, elves etc and people with Dwarfism. I think this is because people with Dwarfism so often play the parts of all these different character roles. The shared label of 'Dwarf/Dwarves' certainly doesn't help clarify either:)
So while Johnathon is right to point out that Fantasy Dwarves are not Human Dwarfs, he is wrong to dismiss Jim's observation about the dehumanizing effect of the relentless mythical and often derogatory representations of people with Dwarfism in the arts.
The reality is, that there is a far greater association between characters like Tolkien's Dwarves and people with Dwarfism than there is with people's feet and the unit of measurement.
Having Dwarfism, people often make some bizarre assumptions about my life. These are not isolated to me, most other Little People complain about the same thing. These stereotypes, myths and traditions have a very real impact on our lives. for example kids sometime sing 'Hi Ho' as I walk past them in the street.
Carys and McKinley are totally right when it comes to the term "Dwarf"; don't label/define someone as 'their height'. A tip for language surrounding and Disability other minority groups is to just avoid Adjectival Nouns.
I know the difference between dwarves and dwarfs. I'm basing my fantasy novel on a dwarven main character, the Tolkien type. I see the difference between a short human and the fantasy dwarf. They are 2 totally different things, I've never even considered them to be the same.
Correct me if I am wrong, but as I remember it the beer and tossing jokes were a later addition in the films, not in Tolkien's books.
I found it an extremely annoying modification.
First things first, you need to consider the proper usage of "Dwarves" vs "Dwarfs" and the history of the word and myths.
Dwarf is derived from Dvergr, who in the original Old Norse myths weren't short (or bearded, beer swilling, gold loving, etc. but those are common attributes of Old Norse), and clearly were not human, along with Alfar (Elves) and Jotnar (Giants). The etymology of Dvergar (plural of Dvergr) is highly debated still, but not one plausible meaning refers to being short. This is the result of the Christianization of Scandinavia, where Dwarves and Elves were seen as lesser races, and were thus reimagined by the Christians rewriting Norse myths as being literally small (prior to Tolkien, the idea of tall and graceful elves weren't truly commonplace). This is why in many folktales, Trolls (horrendous Jotnar) are portrayed in defiance to Christians, capable of smelling a Christian person and acting outwardly aggressive to them.
In effect, to call a little person a dwarf could be taken as insulting, as the word "dwarf" only means small in reference to someone being lesser. Otherwise, it's actually a major misnomer that's simply been accepted over the past few centuries due to the corruption by the Christian scholars of the time.
In truth, Dwarves – the Dvergar – should NOT be small. The only traits they exhibited in contrast to humans and the other inhuman beings of Norse myths was their legendary craftsmanship and living within mountains and hills.
The beer, the beards and all the rest simply stem from the popularization of dwarves in contemporary fantasy since the 70s, where their cultures were largely influenced by the Norse, making dwarves in most settings effectively short vikings.
Consider that Dwarves, Dwarven, Dwarvish, etc. all refer to the mythological and fantasy concepts, whereas Dwarfs, Dwarfish, etc. all refer to the real human little people (which again is still a misnomer that could easily convey offense.)
In my story, my dwarfs are going to be sorta like the concept for them in The Elder Scrolls universe. They're a type of elf, and as tall as the others. Halflings (yeah, putting some of those in), however, are shorter. I have a side character who works with a con artist storyteller and pretends to be a child, using her size to her advantage. She isn't as strong or fast as the other characters, but she's smart and quick witted.
Let me stop you after that first part, Dwarves arn't anymore human than orcs are. What, you ASSUME that the pink skin and rounded ears automatically means human? That's kind of racist you know. The entire notion that dwarves are related to people described as dwarves in our world is a stretch at best, and even if they were, methinks being portrayed as dragon slaying beasts with hearts of gold and camaraderie isn't insulting in anyway.
Tl:dr, you are not a "little person" so don't be offended on their behalf. Stop starting every description with , " as a white male." It's racist, and sad. Dwarves in fantasy share no DNA with mankind, stop being racist. And finally, fuck you for tricking me into thinking this was going to be an article about dwarves when it's just another sad middle aged white man being offended on others behalf, I feel sorry for anyone that had to sit through a campaign with you.


text:
In August 2010, we had one of the worst hire car experiences of our life. It came courtesy of a Kia Rio saloon that looked like it had been dropped down a flight of stairs and housed a pack of wild dogs for the previous few months.
Above 50 miles an hour, the wheel wobble was so bad it practically shook our arms off the steering wheel, and it had that previous-generation Asian car thing of the wiper and indicator stalks being on "the other way around". So every time we tried to indicate off a roundabout, we turned the wipers on instead.
Granted, some of this was not the Rio's fault, more the life it had led and the people who had (ab)used it. But nonetheless, it felt like a throwback. A bad car from an age of motoring we long thought had passed. Nothing about it was nice.
But Kia, as you'll probably know, is a firm that's on the up. Great things are being promised of this new Rio. It's a big car for its class, looks smart and is full of tech, says Kia. For a while, it even laid claim to being the most economical car on sale – with the most economical car in the range offering a CO2 figure of 85g/km and 88mpg. Lofty claims. So in the real world, is the new Rio enough to banish the memory of the hire car experience from hell?
Back in 2006, Kia hired a designer called Peter Schreyer. You've probably never heard of him but the man has done much to influence automotive design: he used to work at VW and Audi - under him, the original TT and the Golf Mk IV were designed. Since joining Kia, he's not just made the designs look half decent, he's also pushed them beyond where many Japanese makes sit, to a level that rivals some of the stuff turned out by his former German employers.
This Rio's no different. It looks solid, pleasingly well resolved and is quite an elegant form. Schreyer's team has even given it a family face – a so-called "tiger nose" grille.
Step inside and it hardly gets worse. Let's not forget this is a cheap and (in some formats) sub-£10k shopping car. On our "2" mid-range trim level test car, you get a soft-touch upper dashboard, air conditioning and toggle switches on the centre console that - with a stretch of the imagination - could have come from a Mini.
It doesn't have he premium-feel of a Polo but it's big inside and, more importantly, it's not a car you'd think twice about being seen on your drive, unlike the generation it replaces. Oh, and you might like to know the indicators and wipers stalks are now the "right" way round, too.
This isn't going to be a discussion about the relatives merits of touchscreen interfaces and sat nav systems. Yet it's pleasing to report that as standard Kia gives you not one but two 12-volt sockets, a USB port and aux-jack. And accessing it all is a doodle, thanks to the press-what-you-see buttons beside the red infotainment screen. This does look a little old-tech, to say the least, but pairing a phone was a doddle, as was playing songs from a USB device.
More impressive, given the low price tag, is the eco-tech that's standard here. Given that Kia can make a stop/start system standard on a £10k Rio, we're even more perplexed as to why VW can't manage it on a brand new, £20k Beetle. It also helps you exploit the engine's fuel-sipping capability with a nannying gear-change up indicator.
- Sky Q update discussed, VanMoof S3 e-bike, and the future of solar charging - Pocket-lint Podcast 61
Given that this is a 3-cylinder, 1.1 litre diesel car, it's not fast. But as long as you're not expecting Ferrari-like acceleration, it never feels as slow as its 0-60 time of 15-odd seconds suggests. It's fun to drive because the engine has an un-diesel like thrum and is really quite flexible in its power delivery.
The ride, on our car's 16-inch wheels was pretty cushy too - not as good as it could be, and lacking the finesse of a Ford, but the suspension's tuned for comfort rather than aggressive cornering, which is as it should be in a car like this.
And that fuel economy? Well, given its bigger wheels and extra kit, the "2" level trim gets you 99g/km of CO2 and supposedly delivers 74mpg - if you want the super-low figure quoted at the start, you'll need the lower level '1' trim. Ultimately, we got only 58mpg. However, let's put this into context. We ignored the gear-change indicator, liked hearing the sound of that thrummy three-cylinder engine and drove it like we were in a hurry.
What's more, on a trip from Leeds back to London and with the tank on empty, we put £20 of diesel in and arrived in Hammersmith - after the most ludicrous of M4 gridlock sessions - with the needle still clinging to the last notch before empty. Be in no doubt, this is a very economical car. And we suspect a more gentle driver than us would see 65-70mpg without much trouble.
Every so often, a car comes along that you don't have any expectation for, that doesn't shout from the roof tops about how amazing it is and yet just works beautifully. This is one of those cars. From the solid thunk of the doors, to that soft-touch dash, the seamless stop-start system and the loping ride, the Rio fitted our lives better than we'd ever expected. In this world of extortionate fuel costs it's on your side, yet need to do a long motorway trip and it's got long enough legs and a refined enough manner not to tire you out.
Better than a Fiesta or Polo? No. And good though the Rio is, it's now priced at a level close to the best in class. But if budget running costs and interior space are your priorities then this should be high up on your shopping list. Don't forget, it comes with Kia's best-in-industry seven-year warranty too. So thank you Kia, for banishing the painful memory of the hire car from hell.


text:
It's been months since you submitted your book proposal and the mail you received today is almost a relief after all the silence. No. The press to which you offered your book (and in which you invested hopes and dreams) says 'no'; they do not want to publish your book. No solid reasons given. You are not sure they even looked properly at the darn thing (but they do say 'sorry' in a nice way).
It takes more than time to write a book. It also takes courage, stamina and self-belief, all of which may leach away in the face of (constant) rejection. And, let's be clear, rejection is the norm. The spurn rate is much higher with journal articles (many journals rejecting as many as 95% of the articles submitted) but the norm is rejection for a book manuscript, too. Luckily, there is (or should be) more than one press or journal to offer your work to.
How then to react to rejection, and to move on positively?
Is it actually 'no'?
Of course, 'no' can come in different shades of black. Sometimes the rejection will not be outright; you may be invited to 'revise and resubmit'. If so, you may enter a process of 'acceptance creep', a period of dialogue during which you revise your work to meet the publisher's requirements. In essence, you have a tiny toe in the door and over time you can work and wiggle to get first a foot in the door, then a leg and finally all of you – of your book – through to the sunny side of publishing.
However, if you have received a blunt 'no', then you need to move on; there is little point arguing with the publisher. Rather, be pleased if the publisher chooses to tell you in any detail why your book has been rejected; such feedback is invaluable. On the basis of the knowledge of the industry, some publishers also helpfully suggest alternative presses which they think might be interested in your work.
Where now?
If that publisher's rejection is final, pause a moment. Do not immediately rush off and submit your manuscript to the next publisher on your list. Reflect on the likely reasons that your proposal was rejected.
- Was this publisher indeed the right one for your book?
- Was your approach to them handled correctly? If not, what can you learn from this?
- Was there a problem with the peer review process? It is not unknown that a scholar's work ends up being judged by a bitter enemy, for instance, or one approaching the topic from an entirely different standpoint than the author's. Knowing this won't improve that reader's report but it will help you face others in the future.
- Is there something wrong with your text itself? On a sliding scale of fixability, common problems are shoddy presentation/spelling, bad writing and poor scholarship.
- Is the big problem financial rather than content? For instance, is the readership/market judged to be too small or will your book be too expensive to produce?
- Or is it (simply, sadly) that you personally are the problem, your authorship isn't believed in?
Only if you take this time to ask the cruel questions – asking exactly what went wrong – can you move on and do something effective about it. Otherwise in all likelihood you are condemning yourself to another round of rejection.
How ever much the rejection hurts (and you may want to shrug the whole thing off as a bad dream), for the sake of your writing career you need to be decisive in response. You have several choices, depending in part on what the original problem was.
- You can abandon the whole thing. This is clean and simple but a drastic, wasteful decision if you have spent months or years working on the book. At the very least, salvage something from the wreckage (the makings of a couple of journal articles, for instance).
- You can simply resubmit/argue the merits of your proposal to the same publisher. People have succeeded here but personally I think it is a waste of your time and of your creative/emotional energies.
- More productive instead is to find/approach another publisher. If so, however, then you need to find out in what ways the new publisher is different from the first. What effect will these differences have on your revised proposal? In other words, will you 'sell' your proposal to the new publisher any differently? At the same time, you should ask yourself how generally might your proposal be improved, no matter which press you approach?
- But a quick response may not be possible; you may need to rework the book (or at least rewrite the book concept). In this work, any critical feedback you receive from earlier rejections (e.g. from readers reports) can be worth gold.
- Improving the economic prospects for the book might be all that is required, of course. Publishers invariably say that subventions don't affect their decision-making but that is nonsense; of course they do – at least in instances where there is no issue with the scholarship but rather the likely production costs are too high (say, with a book full of colour pictures) or expected sales are too low (the market is too small). In such instances, a publication grant can make all the difference. Indeed, let's be clear: there are some publishers whose entire business plan depends on such funding (and here I don't mean vanity presses, either).
- Finally, you may decide to self-publish. Received wisdom denies any place for self-published academic works (let alone recognition in job and funding applications) because of the lack of peer review. However, the ground is shifting here; we are seeing experiments with 'soft peer review', the rise of collaborative writing based on the Creative Commons approach, and other developments resulting from the rise of the internet. That said, self-publishing is not something to venture into lightly. There are many issues and considerable costs or extra work involved, as can be seen in my series of posts dealing with this issue.
In short, you need to gather as much hard information as possible and then do some hard thinking. But, hey, you are a researcher. Isn't that precisely what you have been trained to do?
Good luck!


text:
Page 1
|Save page Remove page
|1 of 161
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
This page
PERFORMANCE PRESERVING DOWNSCALING LAWS IN COMPUTER COMMUNICATION NETWORKS by Fragkiskos Papadopoulos A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING) December 2007 Copyright 2007 Fragkiskos Papadopoulos
Object Description
|Performance preserving downscaling laws in computer communication networks
|Papadopoulos, Fragkiskos
|Author email
|Doctor of Philosophy
|Document type
|Degree program
|Electrical Engineering
|Viterbi School of Engineering
|Date defended/completed
|Date submitted
|Restricted until
|Date published
|Advisor (committee chair)
|Psounis, Konstantinos
|Advisor (committee member)
Prasanna, Viktor K.
Golubchik, Leana
|Understanding and predicting the performance of today's communication networks under new algorithms, architectures and load conditions, are important and challenging research problems.; The largest and most complex network of all is the Internet. Researchers use a suite of tools and techniques in order to understand its performance: measurements, simulations, and deployments on small to medium-scale testbeds. However, because of the Internet's large size, heterogeneity and high speed of operation these techniques often impose many limitations.; To sidestep many of these limitations, in the first part of this thesis we introduce a class of methods to scaled-down the topology of the Internet that enables researchers to create and observe a smaller replica, and extrapolate its performance to the expected performance of the larger Internet.; The key insight that we leverage is that only the congested links along the path of each flow introduce sizable queueing delays and dependencies among flows. Hence, one might hope that the network properties can be captured by a topology that consists of the congested links only. We verify this using extensive simulations with TCP traffic and theoretical arguments. Further, we also show that simulating a scaled topology can be up to two orders of magnitude faster than simulating the original topology.; Another important problem, directly related to the practicability of downscaling, is whether there exist efficient and scalable ways for identifying uncongested links, in large and complex Internet-like networks. Of course, such a question is not only very important for scaling down Internet's topology, but also in many other contexts, e.g. such as in traffic engineering and capacity planning.; With this in mind, in the first part of this thesis we also present simple rules that can be used to efficiently identify uncongested Internet links. In particular, we first identify scenarios under which one can easily deduce whether a link is uncongested by inspecting the network topology. Then, we identify scenarios in which this is not possible, and propose an efficient methodology, based on the large deviations theory and flow-level statistics, to approximate the queue length distribution, and in turn, to deduce the congestion level of a link. We further demonstrate how simple commonly used metrics, such as the link utilization, can be quite misleading in classifying an Internet link.; The second part of the thesis focuses on the design of performance-preserving downscaling techniques for wireless networks. In such networks, the difficulty in managing testbeds deployed on large-scale physical areas, as well as the complexity of the wireless channel and medium access control, are the primary limiting factors for realistic analysis and performance prediction.; We first show that the full behavior of an arbitrary wireless network deployed at one spatial scale can be preserved by a suitably scaled replica consisting of the same number of nodes, but deployed at another (e.g. smaller) spatial scale, as long as the link statistics are preserved. Then, we consider wireless access networks utilizing the IEEE 802.11 standard for medium access control. We identify a set of the IEEE 802.11 protocol parameters, whose simultaneous scaling leaves the system performance virtually independent of the number of users sharing the wireless channel. This result is not only important for facilitating scalable performance prediction of currently deployed networks, but also, sets guidelines for the protocol parameters that we should aim to scale in future versions of the protocol (or in new protocols that utilize similar ideas), so that the system can support a very large number of users, while continuing to deliver to each user at least as good performance as before.
|computer networks; downscaling; performance prediction
|Part of collection
|University of Southern California dissertations and theses
|Publisher (of the original version)
|University of Southern California
|Place of publication (of the original version)
|Los Angeles, California
|Publisher (of the digital version)
|University of Southern California. Libraries
|Legacy record ID
|Contributing entity
|University of Southern California
|Papadopoulos, Fragkiskos
|Repository name
|Libraries, University of Southern California
|Repository address
|Los Angeles, California
|Repository email
|Archival file
|Page 1
|Contributing entity
|University of Southern California
|Repository email
|Full text
|PERFORMANCE PRESERVING DOWNSCALING LAWS IN COMPUTER COMMUNICATION NETWORKS by Fragkiskos Papadopoulos A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING) December 2007 Copyright 2007 Fragkiskos Papadopoulos


text:
Expo Envase Alimentek 2019 - Argentina
We participate in Envase-Alimentek, event organized by the Argentine Institute of Packaging held in Buenos Aires.
Tecnofidta 2018 - Argentina
We were present at the 14th edition of Tecnofidta, the most important international food technology exhibition held in Argentina.
Pan American Congress of the Milk 2018 - Argentin
We participated as Sponsor and Exhibitor in the 15th Pan American Milk Congress organized by FEPALE.
Apymel Tour 2018 – Germany
In March, Eng. Sebastián Benzi joined the Argentine delegation convened by Apymel who was visiting the Anuga Food Tec fair in Germany.
Industrial Merit - FISFE 2017
In September 2017 we received in the city of Esperanza, Santa Fe, the distinction granted by FISFE to Industrial Merit to outstanding companies.
Commercial Training 2017
In August of 2017 we realized a Commercial Training. It was attended by representatives of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay and Central America.
A company is socially responsible when it takes into account the impact that its decisions and activities cause in the company and the environment.
A company is socially responsible when it takes into account the impact that its decisions and activities cause in the company and the environment.
Interview with Mr. Mauricio Colombo
The reason for the visit of Dr. Jorge Henn and Mr. Mauricio Colombo was to inform themselves about the functioning of our company.
See all videos
During his visit, Dr Binner praised "the institutional, productive and economic wealth of the city"he affirmed that "in diversity we find the great chance to build the province that we all yearn...
Dr. Hermes Binner
See all comments
Máquinas Especiales de
Envasado y Empaque
Ruta 6 Km 27,7 - San Carlos Sud
(3017) Santa Fe, Argentina
Te: +54-3404-420785/423185


text:
The Fenway bullpens are 21 feet across. MLB recommends that bullpens be 27 feet wide, though it is not a strict rule*.
* - What is strict and unambiguous, however, is Rule 1.04(a): "Any Playing Field constructed by a professional club after June 1, 1958, shall provide a minimum distance of 325 feet from home base to the nearest fence, stand or other obstruction on the right and left field foul lines, and a minimum distance of 400 feet to the center field fence." At least seven parks are in clear violation: Yankee Stadium and parks used by the Orioles, Rays, Astros, Pirates, Giants, and Padres. MLB has done nothing about it.
Larry Lucchino, on the pens:
They're among the narrowest in baseball, if not the narrowest. It makes it hard for two guys to warm-up. It does have other effects in terms of reducing the depths of right field, which is among the deepest in baseball.The proposal must be approved by the Massachusetts Preservation Society.
According to Ballparks.com, the distance to just right of center field, into the triangle, used to be 550 or 593 feet in the early 1930s (though I think this was the distance to the back wall of the old center field bleachers, where a batted ball could have conceivably ricocheted.) The distance to the right field foul pole has changed many times, going from 313.5 feet in 1921 to 358.5 (1926), down to 325 (1931), back up to 358 (1933), then down to its current distance of 302 (1942).


text: Making good on a promise it made last year, Facebook unlocked its "Open Graph" floodgates on Wednesday evening, allowing developers large and small to submit apps for integration with the new Timeline interface. What does that mean for you? In essence, you'll most likely be seeing a whole bunch of new verbs in your friends' activity feeds, far beyond the usual "likes" you're used to. You could witness your friends "run," "listen" or "eat" things, depending on the apps they've used to record activity. With more than 60 new application partnerships at launch -- and potentially thousands more to come with open sign-ups now available to developers -- how are we to sort the wheat from the chaff? Which apps are actually worth using through Timeline? Fret not. We've tested a number of the apps, and decided which ones work best with the new Timeline integration -- so you need not waste time with the ones that aren't worth your trouble. Photo: Jon Snyder/Wired.com Foodspotting Fine food and wine is amazing. Pictures of said items clogging my Instagram feed, however, are not. It's cool to post a Fatburger shot here and there, but please people, I'm not your diet coach. Thankfully, Foodspotting attempts to solve this problem. Yes, it's an app devoted to sharing pictures of food. But the app is devoted specifically to sharing meal photos, so at the very least, you'll be able to compartmentalize your food porn into small, bite-sized portions. With Foodspotting's integration into Facebook Timeline, now every instance of the dishes you dig will show up in a curated section of your Timeline -- sequestering these images, so your larger data stream won't be populated with random candids of candy. Photo: Jon Snyder/Wired.com Airbnb You're going on vacation and need a place to stay. Motel 6 is nasty, and the Hilton -- while swank -- is far too cookie-cutter. So when Airbnb appeared on the tech startup scene, we loved the idea. It takes the notion of the mom-and-pop-operated bed and breakfast, and brings it to the masses, literally letting anyone rent out his or her place to others. Just post pics of your crash-pad online, and eager travelers can see if they want to stay at your place. Airbnb, of course, takes a cut of your fee. Some houses are obviously better than others, which is where ratings come in. Talk up one place on Airbnb's new Timeline app, and others will follow. It's fancier than word of mouth, and with better visuals.Pinterest Pinterest is hard to pin down, so to speak. It's essentially a web site for cool hunters, not unlike the highly exclusive fffound or even delicious in its heyday. As you browse through the myriad images you come across in your daily web traversing, Pinterest lets you "pin" the coolest images to your profile. Think of it as a cork board for your Timeline. It's a catch-all for crap you don't want to throw away, but don't know where to put. As your friends check out that weird dog picture on your page, they're able to comment and generate longer discussions in a Reddit-like thread. It's random. It's simple. And frankly, it's weird enough to be cool.Runkeeper New year's resolutions are loaded with good intentions. "I will lose weight. I will work out. I will stop sitting on my fat ass all the time." But before long, a new episode of Cops comes on, and we find ourselves reaching for the tub of Rocky Road. With Runkeeper's integration into Facebook, prepare to enter the age of public humiliation. Much like other fitness tracking devices like Fitbit and the Jawbone UP wrist band, Runkeeper's Timeline app keeps you accountable to your group of friends by keeping track of your fitness activity -- in public. So, if the extent of your day's exercise amounts to walking back and forth from the couch to the fridge multiple times, you'll have to deal with that shame online. Sound like fun? Probably not. But, at the very least, we'll be motivated to get ourselves to the gym.Goodreads For the lit snob in all of us, Goodreads brings the prestige of your household bookshelves to the forefront of your Timeline. Basically an online catalog of all the books you've read, Goodreads lets you track your literary exploits online, leaving space for personal reviews and starred recommendations for each title. Friends and strangers can browse your virtual shelves and follow your lead if they wish (or, alternately, critique your awful taste in Harlequin romance novels). We've loved Goodreads since the web site launched a few years ago. After all, it's hard enough to get through a copy of Joyce's Ulysses, let alone subtly name-drop the book in conversation. The new app makes it so you don't have to worry about the latter.Grockit We've liked the idea of Grockit since it popped up on our radar months ago. With Grockit, tackling your GRE studying workload doesn't mean sitting in cafes drinking bad coffee while making flash cards with friends. Instead, you're able to collaborate online and work on problems via web-based blackboards. It's a novel approach to group studying dynamics. First, a disclaimer: Grockit's Timeline integration doesn't boast a cavalcade of new, fancy features outside of badge-like promotions. It's mostly about posting how often you've studied, how many questions you've answered correctly, and the like. It's all about bragging rights. However -- and this is a big however -- it also carries the ability for friends to join and create study rooms using Grockit's web app, linked from inside of Facebook. That means if you're in a Grockit room and studying, your Facebook pals can see as much and decide to join you. That leads to far greater ease of collaboration, and a far greater likelihood that you'll actually have study buddies when it comes time to crack the books.


text:
The EasyMx PRO v7 for STM32 is a development board for STM32 ARM Cortex-M3, Cortex-M4 and Cortex-M7 microcontrollers. It comes with an STM32F107VCT6 on a plug-in CPU module. The board contains many on-board peripherals necessary for development of a variety of applications, including multimedia, Ethernet, USB, CAN, etc.
The board is built with 4-layer PCB routing to achieve excellent signal quality, which is important for SPI and other communication lines running at high speeds. It includes multimedia peripherals such as TFT touch screen, stereo MP3 codec with Headphone and Microphone jacks, microSD slot and Navigation switch.
There are plenty of communication modules on board too: USB Host and Device connectors, two USB-UARTs, Ethernet and CAN module. Two mikroBUS sockets enable you to add Click boards easily.
The board features nine Input/Output PORT groups with IDC10 headers, buttons and LEDs.
No external programming hardware is required, for the board contains a built-in mikroProg fast USB 2.0 programmer and hardware debugger based on the popular ST-LINK v2, capable of programming more than 180 microcontrollers.


text:
Me Traes de un Ala
Bella Lalita dresses generally fit women sized 0-12. For reference, the models on our product pages include their size in each photograph.
Not sure if a Bella Lalita design will work for your size? No problem, our hassle free return policy means you can return the dress for a full refund.
Los vestidos de Bella Lalita generalmente se ajustan a mujeres de talla 0-8 como referencia, la modelo de los vestidos de BellaLalita en nuestra tienda es talla 5.
No está seguro que los vestidos de BellaLalita se ajustará para su talla de ropa? No hay problema, nuestra politica que puede volver el vestido libre de riesgo significa que puedes regresar el vestido para un reembolso completo.
We want you to be completely satisfied with your BellaLalita purchase. If you are not completely satisfied, contact us via the Say Hola button at the bottom of every www.bellalalita.com page to obtain your FREE Return Shipping Label.
- Please use the FREE Return Shipping Label to send the item(s) you would like to return, in new condition, to BellaLalita within 30 days of your ship date.
- Returns received after 30 days from the date of purchase are subject to a 15% re-stocking fee and are not eligible for a FREE Return Label.
- You can return your order to the BellaLalita warehouse for a full refund of the price of the product, minus original shipping charges.
- Return product must be in original condition, free of dirt, debris and show no signs of wear.
- If you return product(s) that are ineligible for free returns, BellaLalita may deduct the shipping costs for the ineligible product(s).
- Refunds will be given in the same payment format as originally received.
- Once your return is received and inspected by our Returns Department, your refund will be processed and a credit will be automatically applied to your credit card or original method of payment within 7 days. Please note that depending on your credit card company, it may take an additional 2-10 business days after your credit is applied for it to post to your account.
- All returns and exchanges require a Return Merchandise Authorization (RMA) number.
Beautiful and colorful handcrafted earrings. Very unique set. Feel special and beautiful.


text:
Joe Wykes
SVP Global Channels & Commerce
Joe joined Acquia in March 2012. He came from Percussion Software where he most recently served as President. During his tenure at the web content management software company, he led the company's expansion into the enterprise market, building strategic partnerships with systems integrators, digital marketing agencies and technology companies. Prior to that Joe ran Worldwide Sales and Alliances for Percussion based out of San Francisco and before that was the Managing Director of Percussion's EMEA operation, again driving record sales in that market.
At Acquia, Joe is responsible for Global Channels. He leads a team responsible for the growth of the Acquia partner ecosystem and its resulting impact on the expansion of Acquia's business. Joe brings together organizations from around the world that are committed to making Drupal the dominant platform for integrated online customer experiences.
Joe grew up in England, graduated in Medieval & Modern History, is a qualified Barrister-at-Law. He and his wife have a son and daughter and live in Marblehead, MA.


text:
The President's Commission on Fiscal Reform, known as Simpson Bowles because it was led by Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles, recommended that we find $6 trillion in spending cuts and new revenues to get the Federal Budget to a healthy place.
I stopped by the Wharton Economic Summit last week to hear Austan Goolsbee, formerly Obama's Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors, give a keynote. In a wide ranging talk that touched on most of the key economic issues facing the US, Goolsbee pointed out that by hook and crook, we have already accomplished half of Simpson Bowles. We might not like the political nonsense around things like the "fiscal cliff" and the "sequester", but they have allowed the folks in DC to implement $3 trillion of spending cuts and new revenue.
But of course, if we have accomplished half of Simpson Bowles, that means we need to get to the second half. And that will be a lot harder because it requires our country to come to terms with entitlements. When asked why it is so hard for the politicians to tackle entitlements, Goolsbee pointed out that the general public believes two important things; we have a spending problem in Washington and we should not touch medicare, medicaid, and social security. Sadly, those entitlements are a big part of our spending problem and left alone, will be the entire spending problem in time.
I read with interest on Peggy Noonan's blog yesterday that the President had dinner last week with much of the Republican leadership and they had a frank and honest conversation about how to get to the second half of the $6 trillion. It's worth reading that post because it suggests that our political leaders actually do have the will to get to Simpson Bowles. It sounds like they all know it must be done.
Of course, there is a big difference between it must be done and it will be done.
When it comes to the economy here in the US, I believe a few things. First, our country might be a mess but it is in better shape than most of the rest of the world. Second, that it is entirely in our power to fix the problems we face. Third, we must take in as much as we spend over the long haul or we will go bankrupt. Fourth, if we take our fiscal medicine and do that responsibly over time we will not go back into a recession. Fifth, our economy is expanding with some vigor now and we have a moment, both economically and politically, that we must not miss.
So I am hoping our leaders find the will to get this done. It is essential, not just for our generation, but most importantly for our future generations.
Read more posts on A VC »


text:
Proceeds from the 2018 Alumni Golf Invitational will benefit BLOCS (Business Leadership Organized for Catholic Schools), Flyers Charities, and the Philadelphia Flyers Alumni Association.
BLOCS (blocs.org) offers children of all races, faiths, and backgrounds the opportunity to attend a Catholic School, with a particular focus on inner city neighborhoods. Each year, BLOCS offers over $3.5 million in scholarships to families and students in need throughout the five-county Philadelphia Region.
Flyers Charities, a division of Comcast-Spectacor Charities (ComcastSpectacorCharities.org), has contributed $25 million to charity. The funds raised from the Flyers Alumni Golf Invitational and other initiatives of Comcast-Spectacor Charities help support hundreds of non-profit organizations throughout the Greater Philadelphia Region.
Philadelphia Flyers Alumni Association, (FlyersAlumni.org) is a 501(c)(3) organization with membership consisting of national and global former Philadelphia Flyers players. Through the years, the Flyers Alumni Association has maintained a tradition of giving back to the Delaware Valley community. Charities that have been supported in the past include St. John's Hospice, Ronald McDonald House, March of Dimes South Jersey, and Junior Achievement of Delaware.


text:
We believe in creating sponsorship opportunities that are bespoke to the client and tailored to their business goals. Each project will be unique and provide an inspiring creative partnership with our artistic programme across all areas of our work, enhancing your company's profile and bringing clients and guests in direct contact with the highly accomplished musicians which you are supporting.
There are four opportunities available for your business to support us across our artistic programme:
- Members' Club
- Corporate Partnerships in London
- Corporate Partnerships in Leicester & Bedford
- Major Sponsorships
For more information, contact David Sutherland, Corporate Partnerships Manager


text:
Gab queen Joan Rivers has got celeb DJ Samantha Ronson hot.
The famed gossip gave Lindsay Lohan a tongue-lashing on Twitter, and got one in return from LiLo's ex, Ronson.
"Lindsay Lohan is so dumb. Her idea of getting sworn in is cursing at the judge," Rivers wrote on Twitter, People reported.
U.S. & World
The day's top national and international news.
Lion-hearted Ronson Tweeted back a furious response. "Hey, Joan Rivers, you have collagen older than Lindsay."
Ronson has been creeping in and out of the "Mean Girls" star's pad as she counts down her days until incarceration. The last time the mercurial pair appeared in the news together, Lohan claimed Ronson threw a drink at her in an L.A. club.
Regardless of their past spatting, Ronson stood shoulder-to-shoulder with Lohan on Twitter.
The aging gossip monger Rivers took another 140-word swype at Lohan: "I was just reading about the new Lindsay Lohan diet, which is all liquid. 80 proof."
Samantha Ronson shot back, "Pick on someone your own age, oh wait I guess people that old can't hear."
Lindsay, who is slated to play pioneering pornstar Linda Lovelace after she gets out of jail, Tweeted on Saturday, "thank you ;)"


text:
An ectopic pregnancy occurs when a fertilized egg implants itself outside of the uterus. Ectopic pregnancies usually occur in a fallopian tube (called a tubal pregnancy). Occasionally, the egg may lodge itself in the ovary, and more rarely, in the cervical canal or the abdominal or pelvic cavities. The fertilized egg doesn't usually grow into a recognizable embryo and can't be transplanted into the uterus.
In a normal pregnancy, the egg is fertilized in the fallopian tube. Little hairs in the fallopian tube move the egg down to the uterus, where it implants itself. If there's scar tissue in the fallopian tube, or it's blocked for some other reason, the fetus will begin to grow outside of the uterus. A woman who has an ectopic pregnancy must have the pregnancy removed because the fetus can't develop properly outside of the uterus and it is dangerous to the woman's health.
Although they're becoming more common in recent years, ectopic pregnancies are generally rare. About 2% of pregnant women will have an ectopic pregnancy.
If you've had an infection in the pelvic region (e.g., pelvic inflammatory disease) or pelvic surgery, or were born with a medical condition that narrowed your fallopian tubes, you have a greater chance of having an ectopic pregnancy. A previous ectopic pregnancy can also increase your risk of a second ectopic pregnancy. An unsuccessful tubal ligation, a sterilization procedure in which the fallopian tubes are cut or blocked, can contribute to the risk of an ectopic pregnancy.
Rarely, ectopic pregnancies have also been linked to the use of progesterone-only birth control pills, and the morning-after pill. Women who use intrauterine devices (IUD, a type of birth control), especially those containing progesterone, have a higher risk of having an ectopic pregnancy if they do become pregnant despite using the IUD. Women who were exposed to a medication called diethylstilbestrol* (a synthetic estrogen) in their mother's womb are also at greater risk of ectopic pregnancy.
The use of certain assisted reproductive techniques may also increase the risk of ectopic pregnancy, as can having multiple sexual partners and cigarette smoking.
Irregular vaginal bleeding or a missed period can be a sign of an ectopic pregnancy, although some women with an ectopic pregnancy continue to menstruate. Most ectopic pregnancies are discovered before the woman even knows she's pregnant.
The growing fetus can damage or rupture the tissue around the reproductive organs, causing internal bleeding and severe pain. If the pregnancy tissue grows too large, it may damage the walls of the fallopian tube. The bleeding that results can be painful and create a feeling of fullness in the abdomen. Severe bleeding can cause a woman's blood pressure to drop to the point where she shows symptoms of shock, including paleness, sweating, weakness, and faintness.
The ectopic pregnancy usually ruptures the wall of the fallopian tube in Weeks 6 to 8 since the last period. An ectopic pregnancy that implants partly in the fallopian tube and partly in the uterus usually ruptures later, between Weeks 12 and 16 of pregnancy. A woman whose fallopian tube has ruptured will feel severe pain that comes on suddenly, and will often faint due to massive internal bleeding in the abdomen. A rupture that occurs later in the pregnancy is very dangerous and can lead to death.
The doctor will do a pelvic examination, blood tests, and ultrasound to check for an ectopic pregnancy. If your blood or urine tests show you're pregnant, but your uterus isn't getting bigger, you may have an ectopic pregnancy. Blood tests that show low levels of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) or a slower than usual rise in hCG can point to an ectopic pregnancy.
An ultrasound scan will then be done to see if the uterus is empty. The scan can also show blood in the abdominal or pelvic cavities. A fibre-optic tube attached to a camera called a laparascope can be inserted through the abdomen to allow the doctor to look inside the uterus. Rarely, a procedure called culdocentesis may also be done to look for unusual fluid in the area behind the uterus.
If an ectopic pregnancy occurs, the doctor must remove the fetus and placenta from the fallopian tube or other area where it has become implanted. This may be done by using the medication methotrexate or laparoscopic surgery.
The medication methotrexate is used to treat early tubal pregnancies in cases where the ectopic pregnancy is believed to be at a low risk of rupturing. It causes the pregnancy to break down and be reabsorbed.
Laparoscopic surgery is also used as a treatment option for ectopic pregnancy if the woman's health is unstable, if there are reasons not to use methotrexate, or in cases of non-tubal ectopic pregnancies, later-term tubal pregnancies, or tubal pregnancies where there is a significant risk of rupture. In this procedure, the doctor inserts a thin tube into the abdominal cavity. The tube has a camera and surgical instruments attached to it.
If the pregnancy is in the fallopian tube, the tube is cut and left to heal naturally, so that scar tissue from the wound doesn't block the fallopian tube. A blocked fallopian tube can make it difficult for a woman to have another baby. In many cases, the fallopian tube must be removed because it's been severely damaged as a result of the ectopic pregnancy. A woman with only one fallopian tube can still become pregnant. If there has been severe bleeding, a blood transfusion may be needed.
While it is not possible to prevent all forms of ectopic pregnancy, there are a few things you can do to reduce your risk of a tubal ectopic pregnancy (an ectopic pregnancy occurring in the fallopian tube), which is the most common type of ectopic pregnancy. Pelvic inflammatory disease (PID) and sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are frequent causes of tubal ectopic pregnancies. Both are preventable. Talk to your doctor about ways to reduce your risk of PID and STIs, such as using condoms and quickly seeking treatment for any infections of the genitals, abdomen, or bladder areas.
*All medications have both common (generic) and brand names. The brand name is what a specific manufacturer calls the product (e.g., Tylenol®). The common name is the medical name for the medication (e.g., acetaminophen). A medication may have many brand names, but only one common name. This article lists medications by their common names. For information on a given medication, check our Drug Information database. For more information on brand names, speak with your doctor or pharmacist.
All material copyright MediResource Inc. 1996 – 2019. Terms and conditions of use. The contents herein are for informational purposes only. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Source: www.medbroadcast.com/condition/getcondition/Ectopic-Pregnancy


text:
Here we are……making our own.
And all you need is nail polish!!
It's ssooooooo easy AND it looks totally REAL, so your kiddos will LOVE it! (My hubby even saw it sitting on the counter and didn't realize it was fake :)
Just wash out your old makeup containers with soap and water, and let them dry thoroughly.
Then, (once you've gotten some cheap Dollar Store nail polish, or use some that you don't use as much anymore), just slowly pour it into your containers where the makeup used to be.
I say slowly because you don't want to accidentally pour out the little mixing beads that are inside. Also, before pouring shake the polish well, but then let it sit for a minute so the air bubbles can rise and pop and not mess up your "makeup."
You can use as much as you want, but as the polish dries, it shrinks, so it will actually look like about half of what you pour in. I used the whole bottle for the "foundation powder" and around a quarter of the large pink bottle for the "blush" and less than an eighth of a bottle for each "eyeshadow." (but, the eyeshadow in the pic is wet, so it will look like less once it dries)
It takes a full 24 hours for the polish to dry, but I waited another few days since it was still pretty stinky (didn't want the kiddos getting high off it), and to make sure it was thoroughly set.
Once I used up the bottle for the "foundation," I thought it would be cool to have play nail polish too! So, I cleaned the brush off with nail polish remover and around the inside of the cap, then I just let the tiny bit that was left over dry inside the bottle for a few days too. We do let our kiddos have painted nails, but they are not allowed to play with the actual bottles of nail polish, so….now they can :)
The best part of these are the cool brushes to use with it!!!
Don't forget to let it dry in a well ventilated area, away from bugs that might get stuck in it. Also, this is probably a craft to do without your kids since, (a) there are lots of fumes & (b) they can't really help much and they can't even play with it for 3 whole days!!!
Well, hope you have fun making your own, I know your kids will LOVE it!


text:
I've always liked Julian Barnes' writing but I've read only a few of his books. The Sense of an Ending reminded me of how skillfully he strings together ideas in the guise of a narrative. The book is an examination of life and of several particular lives through the prism of one character's point of view. The title refers to a philosphical question, the experience of aging, and the factual end of a life inexplicably cut short. It could have been deadly dull inhabiting the mind of a late middle-aged, middle-class British guy but Barnes is too good for that. The book was almost a page-turner.
Tony Webster recalls his high school friendships and the Big Questions of adolescence with extraordinary clarity. The rest of his life has played out with amicable events–a career, a marriage, a child and household, a divorce–nothing too angsty or uncivilized. He thinks he is at peace with his world although niggling doubts about the meaning of it all sneak in around the edges. And then a missive from the blue drops him back into the relationships and confusion of his first love and most fascinating friend, opens the subject of suicide and the subjective or objective nature of it, and teases him with a truth that remains elusive but tantalizing.
Barnes creates compelling characters from what could be standard-issue sixties, middle-class Brits. The students don't dare too much in the physical world–they live half in the mindset of the fifties and are definitely not rockers or hippies or even remotely trendy. They do test ideas relentlessly, wonder about the reliability of memory and history, and are incredibly snobby about intellectualism. As young people, Tony and his friends are self-absorbed and a little clueless. Well, one of them isn't all that clueless but his glittering aura goes somewhat tarnished over time. A first love is suitably nerve-wracking but oddly off-balance. Two tragic deaths seem unrelated but have more in common than first revealed. What Tony discovers holds no satisfaction and no solace but he is an earnest guy who tries to do the right thing and it's easy to forgive his stumbling around and wish him well.
The Big Answer in The Sense of an Ending flattens the exalted worship of theory and makes sense of the anguished reactions to both random damage and logical consequences. Julian Barnes won the Booker Prize for this novel and it is so accomplished and polished a story that it is easy to understand why.
The Sense of an Ending [Deckle Edge] (Vintage International) Julian Barnes | Alfred A. Knopf 2011