What is the setting in relation to the plot in Katherine Mansfield's ''The Garden Party''?

The setting of "The Garden Party" begins at Laura's home
and shifts to the neighborhood and home of the dead man's widow. When the story opens in
medias res (or res in medias), Laura is making preparations for a garden party and
greeting workmen who have come to carry out the details of the arrangements. The house
and garden are the elegant living places of the wealthy Sheridan family and connected to
an accidental killing of a young carter who left a young widow behind him. It is this
accidentally event that forms the main conflict of the story because Laura feels the
moral impropriety of holding a party in the garden after a man lost his life. There is
an implied shift of scene as the party seems to carry on without narratorial comment
aside from scattered stream of consciousness remarks made by Laura that indicates the
fulfillment of the party.

Later, the setting changes to the
neighborhood and home of the young widow when Laura's mother insists that she remain in
her party clothes and go to deliver a platter full of party leftovers to the home of the
grieving young widow. Laura capitulates and goes on the journey down the lane to make
the delivery while still in her garden party dress and black hat. The lane leads Laura
to the cottage of the young man and his widow, which is surrounded by a mournful group
of people through whom Laura makes her way. Inside the cottage, the setting reveals
grieved characters and the body of the young man laid out looking peaceful and restful
in death. While looking at the young man, Laura has a flash of enlightenment, an
epiphany, and realizes how incongruous her presence is there amidst the trappings of
luxury, arrogant life, and garden parties. She exclaims, "Forgive my hat," the symbol of
all the incongruities, and leaves the cottage setting to reenter the lane where her
brother meets her, having come after her to give her encouragement. They share the
knowledge that life is an incongruence of having and not having as her brother says,
"Isn't it, darling?"

On what grounds are criminal laws challenged as to whether they meet Constitutional requirements?

There are a number of bases on which criminal laws can be
challenged.  It all depends upon what kind of conduct the law
prohibits.

For example, laws prohibiting flag desecration
are criminal laws.  They have been appealed on First Amendment, free speech grounds. 
Laws that ban various kinds of hate speech can be appealed on the same
grounds.

A criminal law can also be challenged on privacy
grounds.  For example, the laws that made it a crime to distribute birth control were
struck down on this basis.

It would also be possible to
challenge a criminal law based on the punishment it prescribes.  Such a challenge would
come under the 8th Amendment.

So the grounds on which one
can challenge a criminal law depend largely on what kind of action the law
criminalizes.

How are the two kings, Hamlet's dead father and Claudius, contrasted with one another throughout the play?

In addition to the superb answer above, King Hamlet
& the Ghost can be juxtaposed with Claudius in terms of their own language and
actions and not just on Hamlet's obviously biased
soliloquy.

Both have killed to gain or
maintain power. King Hamlet killed Old Fortinbras to gain lands in
Poland.  Claudius obviously kills King Hamlet to get the
throne.

Both loved Gertrude.
The Ghost tells Hamlet to leave her to heaven, and Claudius tries to get her to stop
drinking the poisoned chalice.

Both are
blind. King Hamlet was blind to his wife and brother's incest and
adultery.  Claudius is blind toward Hamlet and the effects of his incestuous and
murderous crimes on the state.

Both form
unnatural relationships. The Ghost, a supernatural being, elicits a
mortal (his son, no less) to carry out what he should do (haunt Claudius).  Claudius'
relationship with Gertrude is full of incest, adultery,
deceit.

Both want revenge.
King Hamlet wants revenge on Claudius, and Claudius wants revenge on Hamlet.  They both
incite Hamlet to enact revenge.

Both use
pawns as part of revenge. The Ghost uses Hamlet to carry out his plan,
while Claudius uses Polonius' family, R & G.  All of their pawns, by the way,
die.

King Hamlet (Ghost) will go to heaven,
and Claudius will go to hell. The former is a victim of immorality, while
the former is an agent of it.

The Ghost is a
better performer than Claudius. His lines are war-like, gothic,
menacing.  Claudius, especially at prayer, seems much weaker by
comparison.

the temperature & the pressureThe pressure in a constant-volume gas thermometer is 0.700 atm at 100 Celsius degree and 0.512 atm at 0 Celsius...

As the mass and volume of the gas in the thermometer is
constant, the change in pressure of the gas is directly proportional to the rise of
temperature. Stated in other words rise in pressure per degree rise in temperature is
constant.

Given:

Pressure at
100 degrees Celsius = 0.700 atm

Pressure at 0 degrees
Celsius = 0.512
atm

Therefore:

Rise in
pressure for 100 degrees rise in temperature = 0.700 0.512 = 0.188
atm

Therefore:

Rise in
temperature per degree Celsius rise in temperature = 0.188/100 = 0.00188
atm

Therefore:

Temperature in
Celsius corresponding to any pressure p is equal to:

t = (p
- p0)/(rise in pressure per degree Celsius temperature)

=
(p - 0.512)/0.00188

Therefore temperature corresponding to
pressure of 0.040:

= (0.040 - 0.512)/).00188 -
0.112/0.00188 = 59.57 degree Celsius.

Similarly, pressure p
in atm at any given temperature t is given by:

p = p0 +
t*(Rise in temperature per degree Celsius rise in
temperature)

= 0.512 +
t*0.00188

Therefore the pressure at 450 degree
Celsius:

= 0.512 + 450*0.00188 = 0.512 + 0.846 = 1.358
atm

To what extent is Captain John Smith a reliable narrator?Why does he write from a third-person point of view? What does he accomplish by this?

In many of the early accounts of life in the New World,
the reliability of the narrator often comes into question.  Much of this uncertainty
stems from the largely Eurocentric perspective of the accounts, particularly as it
relates to the clash of cultures between European settlers and the native inhabitants. 
As such, much of what is written during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries treats
the subject matter in a rather judgmental way, praising the "civilization" of the
European settlers and denigrating the "savagery" of the native
inhabitants.

John Smith's account of life in early
Virginia, written in the early part of the seventeenth century, does not reflect the
above tendency to a great extent; however, Smith appears to have been aware of the
possibility that his relationship to the events could affect how he discusses them. 
Being "too close" to the subject matter can affect the narrator's ability to strike a
balance in the narrative.  One way Smith seeks to avoid this is to remove himself as
much as possible from the narrative, deciding on third-person narration rather than the
more common first-person format.  The third-person perspective gives Smith's account a
greater air of legitimacy - as if he is merely an observer to the events
described.

The question remains:  What does Smith
accomplish with this narrative technique?  In using third-person, Smith's account
appears more balanced to the reader.  Not only does Smith seem to remove himself from
the events as much as possible, but he also manages to make the account more relatable
to other accounts of the region from the same time.  While the account is that of
Smith's own experience, it is an account that connects with other accounts of the
period; it is not too personal an account.

Should the arline industry accept any blame for the success of the 9/11 attacks?

I think the ext to which airlines industry  can be blamed
for the 9/11 attack, is no more than the extent to which a brick, which has been used to
hit a person, can be blamed for hurting the person. But the the brick is an inanimate
object, while airlines industry is an organization of people, and it would be great
folly for those men from airlines industry to not to accept the responsibility for
preventing such possibilities in future.

I cannot say that
airlines industry has now made it absolutely impossible for terrorist to use air travel
to perpetuate terrorism in any way, but they appear to have accepted their
responsibility to prevent terrorism and are taking many positive actions to curb use of
airlines for terrorism.

What are the main themes in the play " I will Marry When I Want" by Ngugi wa Thiong'o ?

The author Thiong'o is a distinguished professor of
comparative literature at the University of California, Irvine. He is also a known
theorist and author. When he wrote this particular play, it caused quite a bit of
controversy because it pointed out the poor living conditions of the common people in
Kenya. 

The play weaves his interpretation of the living
conditions and culture clashes of post-independence Kenya, when land and wealth were
supposed to be returned to the indigenous people, into a somewhat comedic story about a
family struggling to keep their home and land. Although told as a story about this
family, the author focuses on the political stories throughout the play so that the main
themes stem from this aspect.

The main themes are betrayal
and conflict based on the conflict between commoners and those in charge. The indigenous
commoners were betrayed by those in charge and seemed to have less after British rule
ended than they did before when the opposite was supposed to be the case. Conflict arose
as some of the Africans joined the "Homeguard", siding with the European interests and
took action against fellow Africans.