Lines, Regions and Crossovers Essay Example

Lines, Regions and Crossovers Essay Example Lines, Regions and Crossovers Essay Lines, Regions and Crossovers Essay Firstly In this coursework I will draw six or more lines which will cross each other and while doing this I hope to get as much crossover points as I can, as well as I will try to get the maximum regions. I will try to avoid any sort of double intersecting i. e. intersecting over a ready made crossover point. I will try and keep all my lines as consistent (placement). To make sure I do this I will draw 1 line and then copy past it and then add another line this will help me keep my lines the same i. e.  consistent. But I will vary the number of lines I use. I will draw six line models (each having one more line than the previous one) the first model that I will create will have only one line the second will have two lines the third will have three lines etc. Secondly I will try to figure out the formulas that will find the nth term for the crossover points, open regions, closed regions and the total regions. I also plan to find the relationships / sequence between any two of these characteristics of the line(s). I will accomplish this by using the following formula: A+B (n+1) +0. 5(n-1) (n-2) C. A = 1st term of the sequence. B = the difference between the first two terms. C = the 2nd difference (the difference of the 1st difference). Thirdly I will put all my findings onto to a table consisting of total regions, closed regions, open regions, crossover points and all of the formulas. Lastly I will try to summarize all my findings by writing up a conclusion and evaluation. Prediction I am going to predict that every time the number of lines increases by one the number of open regions will increase by two. For e. g. if there are two lines then the number of open regions will be four. In other words the number of open regions will double the number of closed lines. I predict that the relationship between open regions and closed regions will be a sequence that has a 1st difference and a 2nd difference. This will have to be the case, if I am to work out the nth term in the way I have described above. I also predict that there will always be a greater number of closed regions in comparison to open regions and finally that the number of total regions will be greater than the number of crossover points. Diagrams showing my investigation Summarizing of the 6 lines that I drew with the formulas Patterns I managed to spot while investigating While undergoing the investigation I found numerous amount of patterns e. g. the relationships between open closed regions. The following information will give you insight information about what I managed to find i. e. the relationship between open and closed regions.

Members of the House of Representatives

Members of the House of Representatives There are 435 members of the House of Representatives. Federal law, passed on Aug. 8, 1911, determines how many members are in the House of Representatives. That measure raised the number of representatives to 435 from 391 because of population growth in the United States.   The first House of Representatives in 1789 had only 65 members. The number of seats in the House was expanded to 105 members after the 1790 Census, and then to 142 members after the 1800 headcount. The law that set the current number of seats at 435 took effect in 1913. But it isnt the reason the number of representatives has been stuck there. Why There Are 435 Members   Theres really nothing special about that number. Congress regularly increased the number of seats in the House based on the nations population growth from 1790 to 1913, and 435 is the most recent count. The number of seats in the House has not been increased in more than a century, though, even though every 10 years the census shows the population of the United States grows. Why the Number of House Members Hasnt Changed Since 1913 There are still 435 members of the House of Representatives a century later because of the  Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929, which set that number in stone. The Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 was the result of a battle between rural and urban areas of the United States following the 1920 Census. The formula for distributing seats in the House based on population favored urbanized states and penalized smaller rural states at the time, and Congress could not agree on a reapportionment plan. After the 1910 census, when the House grew from 391 members to 433 (two more were added later when Arizona and New Mexico became states), the growth stopped. That’s because the 1920 census indicated that the majority of Americans were concentrating in cities, and nativists, worried about of the power of foreigners, blocked efforts to give them more representatives, wrote Dalton Conley, a professor of sociology, medicine and public policy at New York University, and Jacqueline Stevens, a professor of political science at Northwestern University. So, instead, Congress passed the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 and sealed the number of House members at the level established after the 1910 census, 435. Number of House Members Per State Unlike the U.S. Senate, which consists of two members from each state, the geographic makeup of the House is determined by the population of each state. The only stipulation spelled out in the U.S. Constitution comes in Article I, Section 2, which guarantees each state, territory or district at least one representative. The Constitution also states that there can be no more than one representative in the House for every 30,000 citizens. The number of representatives each state gets in the House of Representatives is based on population. That process, known as reapportionment, occurs every 10 years after the decennial population count conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau. U.S. Rep. William B. Bankhead of Alabama, an opponent of the legislation, called the Permanent Apportionment Act of 1929 an abdication and surrender of vital fundamental powers. One of the functions of Congress, which created the census, was to adjust the number of seats in Congress to reflect the number of people living in the United States, he said. Arguments for Expanding the Number of House Members Advocates  for increasing the number of seats in the House say such a move would increase the quality of representation by reducing the number of constituents each lawmaker represents. Each House member now represents about 700,000 people. The group ThirtyThousand.org argues that the framers of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights never intended for the population of each congressional district to exceed 50,000 or 60,000. The principle of proportionally equitable representation has been abandoned, the group argues. Another argument for increasing the size of the House is that is would diminish the influence of lobbyists. That line of reasoning assumes that lawmakers would be more closely connected to their constituents and therefore less likely to listen to special interests. Arguments Against Expanding the Number of House Members Advocates for shrinking the size of the House of Representatives often argue that the quality of legislating improves because House members would get to know each other on a more personal level. They also cite the cost of paying for salaries, benefits, and travel for not only the lawmakers but their staffs.

Gross Domestic Product of United Kingdom Assignment

Gross Domestic Product of United Kingdom - Assignment Example It is computed as the difference between exports and imports. In order to stimulate the economy policy makers employ either fiscal or monetary policies to affect macroeconomic variables. For instance, a decrease in interest rate can boost investment and increase the level of GDP. The current situation of UK is a very common trend in every major economy. After skyrocketing mounts in output levels, growth to start to taper off and enter a showdown. The role of policy makers during this stage cannot be overstated. In order to stimulate the economy, macroeconomic variables are regulated. However, as economics is a social science and policy makers are constrained in analyzing the effects of policies in ceteris paribus, it becomes important that they fully asses the economic repercussions of their implementations. This paper will look at the economic performance of the United Kingdom by looking at the recent historical value of GDP. The first part will discuss the behavior of GDP from 1990-2005 and determine the trends underlying this behavior. This report will also try to explain the growth or reduction in GDP by looking at the individual components of GDP. Then, it will discuss the fiscal and monetary policy of UK as well as suggest recommendation to further enhance the performance of the economy. Figure 1 shows the GDP of United Kingdom from ... GDP in constant prices is used following the rationale that it is a more accurate indicator of the real performance of the country. As opposed to measuring GDP in current prices, it relates a realistic situation as it is tied around a base year. The growth rates of GDP in the aforementioned years are also shown in order to describe the behavior of GDP. During 2005, UK reports a 1131.21 billion in GDP, rising by 1.9 percent from the 2004 level and 37 percent relative to the 1990 level. On the average, the economy is expanding at a relatively slow pace of 2.48 percent annually. Sustained growth in GDP is evidenced by the upward trend in the value of output produced. Looking at the growth rates plotted in the other axis, we can see the volatile behavior of GDP with no single trend or pattern. Expansions of output are often followed by troughs which indicate slower growths. In general, we can see positive growth rates with the exception of 1991, when GDP posted a contraction of 1.49 percent. We should also note that since 1993, UK recorded more than 2 percent growth but slowed down in 2005 as it was only able to increase by 1.9 percent. The paper will then conclude with its findings to alleviate the gap in potential and actual output levels. Figure 1 Source: International Monetary Fund World Economic Outlook Database, 2005 Actual and Potential GDP Figure 2 shows the output gap in percent of potential GDP for UK from 1990-2005. At the start of 1990, we can see that the GDP of UK is relatively much higher than its potential GDP evidenced by the positive ratio. In fact, the ratio reached 1.5 which means that UK is producing 50 percent more than its potential GDP. However, this positive ratio had taken a different course in the following year