The Arizona Science Center is a science museum located in Heritage and Science Park in the heart of downtown Phoenix. Home to over 350 permanent hands-on exhibits, the Center provides 400,000 annual visitors with interactive experiences. Aside from the permanent exhibitions, Arizona Science Center has featured a number of nationally traveling exhibitions. Along with daily demonstrations throughout the Center, the Center provides shows in the Dorrance Planetarium and in a five-story, giant screen IMAX Theater; this non-profit corporation provides special educational programs and science activities for visitors of all ages including, summer science camp, Adult’s Night Out, thematic events, Stroller Science preschool programs, the Science on Wheels outreach program. Arizona Science Center the Arizona Museum of Science & Technology, was conceived in 1980 as a pilot science center by the Junior League of Phoenix. Incorporated as a private, non-profit corporation in 1982, the Science Center opened its doors to the public in 1984 as a small 10,000-square-foot storefront exhibition space located in the parking garage level of the downtown Phoenix Hyatt.
The Science Center’s first year of operation saw more than 87,000 visitors. Some of the original hands-on exhibits are still found in the Center today. Growth in attendance and an increasing demand for informal science education programs led to the Science Center being awarded more than $33 million in voter-approved disbursements by the 1988 City of Phoenix bond to provide the land and construction of the Science Center’s new permanent home. Construction of the 120,000-square-foot, Antoine Predock-designed facility was completed in 1997. An additional $4.1 million City of Phoenix bond in 1998 added 22,500 square feet of much needed classroom and dedicated gallery space for traveling exhibitions. The Center has grown to be one of the most popular cultural attractions in the state of Arizona. Arizona Science Center has served more than three million patrons since opening its downtown Phoenix facility in 1997; the current facilities include more than 40,000 square feet of gallery space. Many Hands Make a Home: Explores the materials, processes and knowledge necessary to build a home in Arizona’s unique environment.
All About Me/The Wonder Center: Both mind and body are the subjects of this gallery devoted to human life. Visitors learn about the physiology of moving, the mechanisms of healing, patterns of learning and remembering and new biotechnologies. My Digital World: An exhibition where one can learn more about the information technology that ties us all together; the exhibit, designed by award-winning experience designer Bob Rogers and the design team BRC Imagination Arts, includes Harkins Ham Shack, home of W7ASC, a working Amateur Radio Station, staffed by local volunteers. Visitors to this exhibit can use Morse Code to transmit their name. Get Charged Up: Experiment with basic forces: gravity, electricity and magnetism. In the Fab Lab visitors can see demonstrations by visiting experts. Solarville: An exhibition that provides fascinating visuals and interactive experiences that engage visitors in exploring how we are affected by the sun, alternative ways to obtain energy using the sun and tips for energy conservation.
Forces of Nature: Featuring multiple overhead video screens, surround sound, realistic physical effects and a motion-floor system, the theater showcases one monster storm and extreme geological event after another in a series of immersive montages that puts guests right in the center of the action. The show and the exhibits surrounding the Immersion Theater, which were designed by award-winning experience designer Bob Rogers and the design team BRC Imagination Arts, includes a interactive, three-part exhibit zone where guests are able to experiment with science focused on land and air. Daily Demonstrations: The Science Center’s education staff present free 15-20 minute demonstrations in the theater and stage areas throughout the day. Family Programs: Arizona Science Center offers guests of all ages special themed activities and programs throughout the year that offer visitors additional hands-on experiences on popular science topics. Lecture Presentations: Learn about current science topics and their implications from local and national experts.
Adults Night Out: A monthly lecture series. Be a kid without the kids the 1st Friday of every month. Enjoy the center’s 300 hands on exhibits, watch an IMAX film or planetarium presentation and engage your intellect in a thought provoking presentation. Science Camps: Arizona Science Center offers summer and winter camps that engage youth of all ages in exploring the world and experiencing science hands-on. Science Summer Camp: Each summer, the Center hosts six weeks of summer camp for youth ages six through eleven at the Center and at an East Valley school; each weeklong session engages youth with a variety of hands-on themes activities, exploration of the Science Center and an end-of-camp Open House. BMI @ BNI Summer Camp: The Center hosts a special, hands-on camp at the Barrow Neurological Institute for youth ages 12 to 14 – the Biotechnology Medical Institute at Barrow Neurological Institute of St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center. Participating Teens join the BNI staff for a weeklong investigation on Doctoring DNA, in which they extract real DNA from plant tissue, explore working laboratories and operating rooms used to research and develop oncology treatment methods and research activities in the effectiveness of various treatments/medicines on cancerous tumor c
The SEQUAL framework is systems modelling reference model for evaluating the quality of models. The SEQUAL framework, which stands for "semiotic quality framework" is developed by John Krogstie and others since the 1990s; the SEQUAL framework is a so-called "top-down quality framework", based on semiotic theory, such as the works of Charles W. Morris. Building on these theory it "defines several quality aspects based on relationships between a model, a body of knowledge, a domain, a modeling language, the activities of learning, taking action, modeling", its usefulness, according to al. was confirmed in a 2002 experiment by Moody et al.. The basic idea behind the SEQUAL framework is, that "conceptual models can be considered as sets of statements in a language, therefore can be evaluated in semiotic/linguistic terms". A first semiotic framework for evaluating conceptual models was proposed by Lindland et al. in the 1994 article "Understanding quality in conceptual modeling". In its initial version, it considered three quality levels: syntactic and pragmatic qualityThe framework was extended, called the SEQUAL framework by Krogstie et al. in the 1995 article "Defining quality aspects for conceptual models". in the 2002 article "Quality of interactive models" Krogstie & Jørgensen extended the initial framework adding more levels of Stamper's semiotic ladder.
Modeling is an integral part of many technical fields, including engineering and software engineering. In this context, a model is a formal representation of an organizational system, such as a business model or a formal description of software in UML. Model activation, according to John Krogstie, is the process. Model activation involves actors interpreting the model and to some extent adjusting their behaviour accordingly; this process can be: automated, where a software component interprets the model, where the model guides the actions of human actors, or interactive, where prescribed aspects of the model are automatically interpreted and ambiguous parts are left to the users to resolve. The Quality Framework works with a set of eight items: A: Actors that develop or have to relate to the model. Can be persons or tools. L: What can be expressed in the modeling language M: What is expressed in the model D: What can be expressed about the domain K: The explicit knowledge of the participating persons I: What the persons in the audience interpret the model to say T: What relevant tools interpret the model to say G: The goals of the modeling The three main aspects of physical quality are: Externalization or the question "Is it possible to externalize knowledge by using the model language?", Internalizability about model persistence and availability, Basically or the question "Is the model language able to express the model domain?"Externalization is presenting the modeller's concept in some model form for others to make sense of it.
Other people can discuss. How other people perceives the model is a matter of internalization. After perceiving the model in their own way they can change their mind accordingly. To make sense others, it is better to have some model language in common. Physical quality refers to the possibility of externalizing models by using model language that should be available and of course in persistence manner to be internalized by audiences. How available is the model to audience? Availability depends on distributability when members of the audience are geographically dispersed. A model, an electronically distributable format will be more distributed than one which must be printed on paper and sent by ordinary mail or fax, it may matter what is distributed, e.g. the model in an editable form or in an output format. How persistent is the model, how protected is it against loss or damage? This includes previous versions of the model, if these are relevant. E.g. for a model on disk, the physical quality will be higher if there is a backup copy, or higher if this backup is on another disk whose failure is independent of the originals.
For models on paper, the amount and security of backup copies will be essential. To evaluate empirical quality, the model should be well externalized. Main aspects are: Ergonomics, readability and information theory. Empirical quality is about the question "Is the model readable?". Empirical quality deals with the variety of elements distinguished, error frequencies when being written or read and ergonomics for Computer-Human Interaction for documentation and modeling-tools. Ergonomics is the study of workplace design and the physical and psychological impact it has on workers; this quality is related to layout. There are different factors that have an important impact on visual emphasis like size, foreground/background differences, colour,change, position and so on. For graph aesthetics there may be different consideration like angles between edges not be too small, minimize the number of bends along edges, minimize the number of crossings between edges, place nodes with high degree in the centre of the drawing, have symmetry of sons in hierarchies, have uniform density of nodes in the drawing, have verticality of hierarchical structures and so on.
Syntactic quality is the correspondence between the model M and the language extension L of the language in which the model is written. Three aspects here are: Error detection: During a modeling session, some syntactical errors--- syntactic incompleteness --- should be al
The 1st Arkansas Infantry was a Confederate Army infantry regiment during the American Civil War. The regiment was raised in April 1861 by Colonel Thompson B. Flournoy, it moved first to Virginia, but transferred back to Tennessee and served the rest of the war in the western theater, seeing action in the Kentucky and Georgia campaigns. Following its depletion in numbers, the regiment was consolidated several times with other Arkansas regiments merging in 1865 into the 1st Arkansas Consolidated Infantry Regiment. There were three regiments known as "1st Arkansas" during the war; the second unit with the designation of "1st Arkansas" was the 1st Infantry, Arkansas State Troops, mustered into Confederate service at Pitman's Ferry, Arkansas, on 23 July 1861, under the command of Colonel Patrick Cleburne. The third unit bearing the title "1st Arkansas" was the 1st Arkansas Volunteer Infantry, which served with the Union Army; the 1st Arkansas regiment began its organization in April 1861, before Arkansas had seceded from the Union.
The first Arkansas Secession Convention had voted against secession. On 12 April, Confederate forces under General P. G. T. Beauregard bombarded Fort Sumter. President Abraham Lincoln called upon the "militia of the several states" to provide 75,000 troops to put down the rebellion. Governor Henry Rector famously refused Lincoln's request for troops. Upon learning of Rector's refusal, Confederate Secretary of War, L. P. Walker wrote to Governor Rector on behalf of the Confederate Government at Montgomery and requested that the state provide a regiment for the Confederacy. MONTGOMERY, Gov. HENRY M. RECTOR, Little Rock, Ark.: SIR: Your patriotic response to the requisition of the President of the United States for troops to coerce the Confederate States justifies the belief that your people are prepared to unite with us in repelling the common enemy of the South. Virginia needs our aid. I there- fore request you to furnish one regiment of infantry without delay, to rendezvous at Lynchburg, Va, it must consist of ten companies, of not less than sixty-four men each.
The regiment will be entitled to one colonel, one lieutenant-colonel, one major, one adjutant from the line of lieutenants, one~ sergeant-major from the enlisted men. Each company is entitled to one captain, one first lieutenant, two second lieutenants, four sergeants, four corporals, two musicians; the officers, except the staff officers, are to be appointed in the manner prescribed by the law of your State. Staff officers are appointed by the President, they will be mustered into the service at Lynch- burg, but transportation and subsistence will be provided from the point of departure. They will receive its value in commutation. You have arms and ammunition with. Answer and say whether you will comply with this request, and, if so, when. L. P. Walker Secretary of War Governor Rector responded that he had no power to comply with the Confederate request but he expected the state to secede when the secession convention reconvened on 6 May, he stated that after secession the state would aid the Confederacy.
Governor Rector sent another dispatch requesting to know if the Confederacy would accept a regiment raised by T. B. Flournoy, as Colonel, John B. Thompson as Lieutenant Colonel, W. N. Brougnah and James. B. Johnson. Further, Governor Rector agreed to arm and equip the regiment when it rendezvoused at Little Rock Arsenal. Thompson B. Flournoy was a planter from Laconia, in Desha County, had supported the Douglas and Johnson ticket in the election of 1860. Colonel Flournoy began by organizing the first companies which arrived in Little Rock seeking service in the Confederate forces. Many of these initial companies had been organized as volunteer companies under the Arkansas Militia law which authorized each county to form, in addition to the standard militia regiment, up to four volunteer companies, one each of Rifles, Infantry and Cavalry. Units such as the DeWitt Guards from Arkansas County and the Jackson Guards from Jackson County had organized months earlier in the state militia as sectional frictions increased.
At the actual organization of the regiment at Little Rock on 6 May 1861, Flournoy was defeated for the colonelcy, Captain James F. Fagan, of Saline County, was elected colonel. Monroe, of Clark County, was elected lieutenant-colonel, John Baker Thompson, major. Prof. Frank Bronaugh, of the military department of St. John's College, Little Rock, was chosen adjutant. Flournoy accepted the outcome with good grace; the unit was composed of companies from the following Arkansas counties: Company A – "The El Dorado Sentinels" – of Union County, commanded by Capt. Asa Morgan; this unit was first organized as the El Dorado Troop, a volunteer cavalry company in the 29th Regiment, Arkansas State Militia, on February 15, 1861. Company B – "The Clark County Volunteers" – of Clark County, commanded by Capt. Charles Stark. Company C – "The Camden Knights" – of Ouachita County, commanded by Capt. Crenshaw; this company had been organized as a volunteer company in the 39th Regiment, Arkansas State Militia on April 29, 1861.
Company D – "The Clan McGregor" – of Jefferson County, commanded by Capt. Donelson McGregor. McGregor had been elected as the Colonel of the 24th Regiment, Arkansas State Militia, on February 22, 1860, organized his company from his militia regiment. Company E – "The Saline Guards" – of Saline County
Apatin is a town and municipality located in the West Bačka District of the autonomous province of Vojvodina, Serbia. As of 2011 census, the population of the town is 17,411, while the municipality has 28,929 inhabitants. In Serbian, the town is known as Apatin, while the same name is used in German, Romanian and Hungarian. According to some claims, the name Apatin is derived from the old form Opaty, by which the town was first mentioned in the 11th century; the Municipality of Apatin is located on the left bank of the Danube river, between the municipalities of Sombor and Odžaci. Apatin is situated in the north-western part of the spacious plain in Bačka, on the left side of the Danube, it is in the autonomous province of Vojvodina. The favourable geographic position, proximity to the Danube, natural wealth of this area attracted people through all ages and made them settle here; because of these reasons in pre-historic times, cultures such as the Sarmatians, the Celts, the Goths and many others were replacing each other within this region, one by one.
In the 1st century, during the Roman conquest, the settlement was turned into a military trench with fortifications, played an important role in the defense of the Pannonia province. Subsequently, the area came under control of the Huns and Avars. In the 6th century the Slavs settled, in the 9th century, the area was included into the Bulgarian Empire. Bulgarian duke Salan who had residence in Titel ruled over region of Bačka. In the 10th century the Hungarians came to Central Europe, thereby establishing a state, populated by both and Slavs; the first mentioning of Apatin in any written script was in the year 1011, by the Abbey of Kalocsa Bishopric. According to other source, Apatin was firstly mentioned in 1407. During this time, settlement was part of the Bodrogiensis County within the medieval Kingdom of Hungary. During the 14th and 15th centuries, the area became feudalistic, in exchange for lands, the vassals would need to complete military service to the lord of the property. Many fishermen and millers began to settle down in this area.
In 1417, Apatin is mentioned as a property of Stefan Lazarević, crowned as the Despot of Serbia in 1402. In 1526-1527 it belonged to the short-lived Serb state of Emperor Jovan Nenad, soon after this area became part of the Ottoman Empire. During the Ottoman administration Apatin was part of the Sanjak of Segedin and was populated by ethnic Serbs. In the end of the 17th century it became part of the Habsburg Monarchy. Many of the refugees during the massive migration of Serbs led by Arsenije Čarnojević in 1690, came to Apatin and Prigrevica, thus the Serb population in this area increased. A new wave of colonisation occurred in 1748 when many German colonists settled in Apatin, pushing out the Serbs by force, who evacuated towards Stapar; the German colonists came from many different regions. The gathering centre was in Ulm and from that point they were transported by the Danube to Apatin, which became the main base of the German expansion in Vojvodina; the church was built near the port and the city square was built at this time.
The real estate value of buildings, such as schools, fishermen’s station, hand craft’s workshops, began to rise. The Chamber of Court decided to put forth economic objectives to better the economy, in 1756 the brewery and distillery were built. In 1764 a large textiles factory was built. In 1760 Apatin was proclaimed a town and a main trade centre with a special status. At the end of the 18th century, a catastrophic flood destroyed the old town square, ruined half of the settlement; the new square was built north-westward from the brewery. The town as seen today, began to take shape. During the 18th and in the early part of 19th century, Apatin had prospered economically because of developed trade and shipbuilding. During the initial years of the Habsburg administration, Apatin was administratively a part of the Batsch County within the Habsburg Kingdom of Hungary. Subsequently it was included into the newly formed Batsch-Bodrog County. In 1848-1849 Apatin was part of the Serbian Voivodship, a Serb autonomous region within Austrian Empire, between 1849 and 1860 it was part of the Voivodeship of Serbia and Banat of Temeschwar, a separate Austrian province.
After abolishment of the voivodeship, in 1860 it was again included into Batsch-Bodrog County within the Habsburg Kingdom of Hungary, which became one of two autonomous parts of the Monarchy after 1867. In the year of 1869 numerous banks and saving-banks were established, that opened the door to industrial development. A great number of brickyards produced brick and tile, which were used to construct many buildings in Vienna and all in Pest. In 1912 Apatin was connected to Sombor and Sonta by the railroad, the following year, a shipyard was founded. Today, the shipyard has been modernized as it the only shipyard on the whole Danube which has a special lift for drawing boats out onto the docks. According to 1910 census, most of the inhabitants of Apatin spoke the German language. In 1918, as part of Banat, Bačka and Baranja, Apatin became part of the Kingdom of Serbia, which together with the Kingdom of Montenegro and the State of Slovenes and Serbs formed the Kingdom of Serbs and Slovenes. In 1918-1919, Apatin was part of the Banat, Bačka and Baranja region and part of the Novi Sad District.
Between 1922 and 1929, the town w
The death of Alexander the Great and subsequent related events have been the subjects of debates. According to a Babylonian astronomical diary, Alexander died between the evening of June 10 and the evening of June 11, 323 BC, at the age of thirty-two; this happened in the palace of Nebuchadnezzar II in Babylon. Macedonians and local residents wept at the news of the death, while Achaemenid subjects shaved their heads; the mother of Darius III, having learned of Alexander's death, refused sustenance and died a few days later. Historians vary in their assessments of primary sources about Alexander's death, which results in different views. In February 323 BC, Alexander ordered his armies to prepare for the march to Babylon. According to Arrian, after crossing the Tigris Alexander was met by Chaldeans, who advised him not to enter the city because their deity Bel had warned them that to do so at that time would be fatal for Alexander; the Chaldeans warned Alexander against marching westwards as he would look to the setting sun, a symbol of decline.
It was suggested that he entered Babylon via the Royal Gate, in the western wall, where he would face to the east. Alexander followed this advice. According to Jona Lendering, "it seems that in May 323" the Babylonian astrologers tried to avert the misfortune by substituting Alexander with an ordinary person on the Babylonian throne, who would take the brunt of the omen; the Greeks, did not understand that ritual. Calanus was to be a Hindu Naga sadhu, whom Greeks called gymnosophists, he had accompanied the Greek army back from Punjab, upon request by Alexander. He was seventy-three years of age at that time. However, when Persian weather and travel fatigue weakened him, he informed Alexander that he would rather die than live disabled, he decided to take his life by self-immolation. Although Alexander tried to desist him from doing so but upon the insistence of Calanus, Alexander relented and the job of building a pyre was entrusted to Ptolemy; the place where this incident took place was Susa in the year 323 B.
C. Calanus is mentioned by Alexander's admiral and Chares of Mytilene, he did not flinch. Before immolating himself alive on the pyre, his last words to Alexander were "We shall meet in Babylon", thus he is said to have prophesied the death of Alexander in Babylon. At the time of the death of Calanus, however, did not have any plan to go to Babylon. No one understood the meaning of his words "We shall meet in Babylon", it was only after Alexander fell sick and died in Babylon, that the Greeks came to realize what Calanus intended to convey. Proposed causes of Alexander's death included alcoholic liver disease and strychnine poisoning, but little data support those versions. According to the University of Maryland School of Medicine report of 1998, Alexander died of typhoid fever. In the week before Alexander's death, historical accounts mention chills, sweats and high fever, typical symptoms of infectious diseases, including typhoid fever. According to David W. Oldach from the University of Maryland Medical Center, Alexander had "severe abdominal pain, causing him to cry out in agony".
The associated account, comes from the unreliable Alexander romance. According to Andrew N. Williams and Robert Arnott, in Alexander the Great's last days he became mute, he became mute because of a previous injury to his neck from the Siege of Cyropolis. Other popular theories hold that Alexander either was poisoned. Other retrodiagnoses include noninfectious diseases as well. According to author Andrew Chugg, there is evidence Alexander died of malaria, having contracted it two weeks before his death while sailing in the marshes to inspect flood defences. Chugg based his argument on Ephemerides by otherwise unknown Diodotus of Erythrae, although the authenticity of this source has been questioned, it was noted that the absence of the signature fever curve of Plasmodium falciparum diminishes the possibility of malaria. The malaria version was nonetheless supported by Paul Cartledge. Throughout the centuries suspicions of possible poisoning have fallen on a number of alleged perpetrators, including one of Alexander's wives, his generals, his illegitimate half-brother or the royal cup-bearer.
The poisoning version is featured in politically motivated Liber de Morte Testamentoque Alexandri, which tries to discredit the family of Antipater. It was argued that the book was compiled in Polyperchon's circle, not before c. 317 BC. This theory was advanced by Justin in his Historia Philippicae et Totius Mundi Origines et Terrae Situs where he stated that Antipater murdered Alexander by feeding him a poison so strong that it "could be conveyed in the hoof of a horse.". In Alexander the Great: The Death of a God, Paul C. Doherty claimed that Alexander was poisoned with arsenic by his illegitimate half-brother Ptolemy I Soter. However, this was disputed by New Zealand National Poisons Centre toxicologist Dr Leo Schep who discounted arsenic poisoning and instead suggested that he could have been poisoned by a wine made from the plant Veratrum album, known as white hellebore; this plant was known to the Ancient Greeks and it can produce prolonged poisoning symptoms that match the course of events as described in the Alexander Romance.
Epigonus of Pergamum was the chief among the court sculptors to the Attalid dynasty at Pergamum in the late third century BCE. Pliny the Elder, who offers the only surviving list of the sculptors of this influential Pergamene school, attributes to him works among the sculptures on the victory monument erected by Attalus I in the sanctuary of Athena at Pergamum to commemorate his victory over the Gauls of Galatia. Among works there by other sculptors, Pliny attributes to Epigonos a masterful Trumpeter and "his infant pitiably engaged in caressing its murdered mother"; the Weeping Child pitifully caressing its murdered mother is "associated with the so-called Dead Amazon in Naples, a copy of a group, once part of the second Gallic dedication of Attalos, at Athens.... From drawings of this composition made in the Renaissance, we learn that the child was removed from the Naples statue during the sixteenth century". Another sculpture from the same monument exists in marble copy of the Gaul Killing Himself and His Wife in the Ludovisi collection.
Eight signed bases from the acropolis of Pergamon have lost their sculptures of valuable bronze, doubtless laboriously cut apart for the sake of the metal and refounded during Christian times. Andrew Stewart, One Hundred Greek Sculptors: Their Careers and Extant Works T.150, T.151