click links in text for more info
SUMMARY / RELATED TOPICS

Common descent

Common descent is a concept in evolutionary biology applicable when one species is the ancestor of two or more species in time. Its broadest application, the last universal common ancestor of all life on Earth, is a central assumption of modern evolutionary theory. Common descent is an effect of speciation, in which multiple species derive from a single ancestral population; the more recent the ancestral population two species have in common, the more are they related. The most recent common ancestor of all living organisms is the last universal ancestor, which lived about 3.9 billion years ago. The two earliest evidences for life on Earth are graphite found to be biogenic in 3.7 billion-year-old metasedimentary rocks discovered in western Greenland and microbial mat fossils found in 3.48 billion-year-old sandstone discovered in Western Australia. All living organisms on Earth share a common genetic heritage, though the suggestion of substantial horizontal gene transfer during early evolution has led to questions about the monophyly of life.

6,331 groups of genes common to all living animals have been identified. Universal common descent through an evolutionary process was first proposed by the British naturalist Charles Darwin in the concluding sentence of his 1859 book On the Origin of Species: There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been breathed into a few forms or into one. In the 1740s, the French mathematician Pierre Louis Maupertuis made the first known suggestion that all organisms had a common ancestor, had diverged through random variation and natural selection. In Essai de cosmologie, Maupertuis noted: May we not say that, in the fortuitous combination of the productions of Nature, since only those creatures could survive in whose organizations a certain degree of adaptation was present, there is nothing extraordinary in the fact that such adaptation is found in all these species which now exist? Chance, turned out a vast number of individuals. A much greater number showed neither order.

Thus the species which we see today are but a small part of all those that a blind destiny has produced. In 1790, the philosopher Immanuel Kant wrote in Kritik der Urteilskraft that the similarity of animal forms implies a common original type, thus a common parent. In 1794, Charles Darwin's grandfather, Erasmus Darwin asked: ould it be too bold to imagine, that in the great length of time, since the earth began to exist millions of ages before the commencement of the history of mankind, would it be too bold to imagine, that all warm-blooded animals have arisen from one living filament, which the great First Cause endued with animality, with the power of acquiring new parts attended with new propensities, directed by irritations, sensations and associations. Charles Darwin's views about common descent, as expressed in On the Origin of Species, were that it was probable that there was only one progenitor for all life forms: Therefore I should infer from analogy that all the organic beings which have lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed.

But he precedes that remark by, "Analogy would lead me one step further, namely, to the belief that all animals and plants have descended from some one prototype. But analogy may be a deceitful guide." And in the subsequent edition, he asserts rather, "We do not know all the possible transitional gradations between the simplest and the most perfect organs. Grave as these several difficulties are, in my judgment they do not overthrow the theory of descent from a few created forms with subsequent modification". Common descent was accepted amongst the scientific community after Darwin's publication. In 1907, Vernon Kellogg commented that "practically no naturalists of position and recognized attainment doubt the theory of descent."In 2008, biologist T. Ryan Gregory noted that: No reliable observation has been found to contradict the general notion of common descent, it should come as no surprise that the scientific community at large has accepted evolutionary descent as a historical reality since Darwin’s time and considers it among the most reliably established and fundamentally important facts in all of science.

All known forms of life are based on the same fundamental biochemical organization: genetic information encoded in DNA, transcribed into RNA, through the effect of protein- and RNA-enzymes translated into proteins by ribosomes, with ATP, NADPH and others as energy sources. Analysis of small sequence differences in shared substances such as cytochrome c further supports universal common descent; some 23 proteins are found in all organisms, serving as enzymes carrying out core functions like DNA replication. The fact that only one such set of enzymes exists is convincing evidence of a single ancestry. 6,331 genes common to all living animals have been identifie

Engineering Design and Management v. Burton

Tracey, T/A Engineering Design & Management v Burton, IESC 16, was an Irish Supreme Court case in which the Supreme Court considered the Irish courts' ability to limit the right of access to the courts and, in extreme cases, to dismiss proceedings. The appellant brought proceedings against the respondents in the High Court seeking damages and financial loss following the termination of a contract; the High Court judge held that the relevant case did not involve defamation proceedings and that the appellant had no right to a jury trial. As a result, Kearns P ordered that the case be transferred from the jury list to the non-jury list and ordered that the appellant pay the respondents' costs; the appellant was not present or represented during the High Court proceedings and at the time failed to give the court an explanation as to his absence, satisfactory to the High Court judge. Rather than applying to have the High Court decision set aside, the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court claiming that his case did involve issues of defamation and that the High Court judge was biased against him.

MacMenamin J delivered the only written judgment for the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court rejected the appellant's argument that the High Court judge had been biased or that he had in any way acted improperly; the order that the High Court made was not one to dismiss the appellant's claim, but was, rather, a much less significant procedural order that the case be transferred to the non-jury list. The Supreme Court held that such a procedural order to transfer the case to the non-jury list was correct as these proceedings could not properly be characterised as defamation proceedings. While there exists a right to a jury trial in cases of defamation, defamation requires "explicit and clear pleading", something, not done in this case. In the absence of any such pleading the Supreme Court noted that "t does not lie within the power of this Court to now, effectively,'transform' this claim into'defamation proceedings', or a'part-defamation' proceedings." MacMenamin J took the opportunity to provide guidance on the courts' ability to limit the right of access to the courts and, in extreme cases, to dismiss proceedings.

Alluding to recent incidents that had occurred in other court proceedings, MacMenamin J noted that it was "necessary to reiterate some matters which are fundamental". These are that:"n all legal proceedings, whether a litigant is represented or not, a point may be reached where the conduct of such litigation is so dilatory, or so vexatious, or proceeds in a manner which either breaks or ignores rules of procedure, or where there is such egregious misconduct either before court, or in court itself, as to raise questions as to whether the right of access to the court should be limited, or, in extreme cases, whether a case should be struck out. Put the questions are whether there is abuse of process to such a degree that a claim should not be allowed to proceed, or whether such a claim should be allowed to proceed only under identified procedural conditions, or in a manner proportionate to the circumstances, while seeking, as far as is practicable, to vindicate that constitutional right to litigate proceedings."The fact that an appellant represents themselves in court does not alter the duties owed to that court, or the obligation to comply with the rules of court.

Citing from the case of O'Reilly McCabe v. Minister for Justice,& Patrick Cusack Smith & Co, MacMenamin J noted that "the constitutional right of access to the courts, while an important right, is not an absolute one" The courts must protect the rights of opposing parties, the principle of finality of litigation, the resources of the courts and the right to fair procedures enjoyed by every party to a litigation. MacMenamin J noted that, subject to the provisions of the Constitution, the courts can assist litigants and their legal representatives "by considering the papers in a case beforehand. However, at the same time and their legal representatives must abide by the rules of the court or run the risk of having conditions placed on the litigation, or being faced by a more radical sanction such as wasted costs orders, a postponement of proceedings or a dismissal of those proceedings for abuse of process. While the Supreme Court agreed with the order made by the High Court judge that the case be transferred to the non-jury list, MacMenamin J noted a residual concern that "justice be seen to be done".

As a result, the Supreme Court set aside only the part of the High Court judgement and order where costs had been awarded against the appellant in the appellant's absence. Noting that the Supreme Court had given the appellant "an extraordinary degree of latitude", MacMenamin J sent back the remainder of the proceedings to the High Court to be dealt with as a non-jury case. Practice and Procedure Tracey, T/A Engineering Design & Management v Burton

United States Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs

The United States Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, Related Programs is one of twelve subcommittees of the United States Senate Committee on Appropriations. The United States Senate Committee on Appropriations has joint jurisdiction with the United States House Committee on Appropriations over all appropriations bills in the United States Congress; each committee has 12 matching subcommittees, each of, tasked with working on one of the twelve annual regular appropriations bills. Traditionally, after a federal budget for the upcoming fiscal year has been passed, the appropriations subcommittees receive information about what the budget sets as their spending ceilings; this is called "302 allocations" after section 302 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974. That amount is separated into smaller amounts for each of the twelve Subcommittees; the federal budget is not signed by the President. Instead, it is the Senate in making appropriations and tax decisions. However, no budget is required and each chamber has procedures in place for what to do without one.

The House and Senate now consider appropriations bills although the House went first. The House Committee on Appropriations reports the appropriations bills in May and June and the Senate in June. Any differences between appropriations bills passed by the House and the Senate are resolved in the fall. An appropriations bill is a bill that appropriates money to specific federal government departments and programs; the money provides funding for operations, personnel and activities. Regular appropriations bills are passed annually, with the funding they provide covering one fiscal year; the fiscal year is the accounting period of the federal government, which runs from October 1 to September 30 of the following year. There are three types of appropriations bills: regular appropriations bills, continuing resolutions, supplemental appropriations bills. Regular appropriations bills are the twelve standard bills that cover the funding for the federal government for one fiscal year and that are supposed to be enacted into law by October 1.

If Congress has not enacted the regular appropriations bills by the time, it can pass a continuing resolution, which continues the pre-existing appropriations at the same levels as the previous fiscal year for a set amount of time. The third type of appropriations bills are supplemental appropriations bills, which add additional funding above and beyond what was appropriated at the beginning of the fiscal year. Supplemental appropriations bills can be used for things like disaster relief. Appropriations bills are one part of spending process, they are preceded in that process by the president's budget proposal, congressional budget resolutions, the 302 allocation. Article One of the United States Constitution, section 9, clause 7, states that "No money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law..." This is. The President, still has the power to veto appropriations bills; this subcommittee oversees the U. S. State Department and several international programs and agencies, including international programs within the Department of Defense.

It manages the Peace Corps, the Export-Import Bank, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe, United States contributions to the International Monetary Fund and United Nations activities. United States House Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, Related Programs United States Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, Related Programs

2013 Dunlop V8 Supercar Series

The 2013 Dunlop Series was an Australian motor racing competition for V8 Supercars. It was the fourteenth running of a V8 Supercar Development Series, with all rounds held in support of 2013 International V8 Supercars Championship events; the introduction of the "New Generation V8 Supercar" regulations to the V8 Supercar Championship resulted in a number of rule changes which affected the Dunlop Series. Teams were only allowed to compete. All teams competing with Fords upgraded to the FG Falcon, whilst the Holden teams continued to use the VE Commodore. With all V8 Supercar teams building brand-new chassis for the 2013 season to comply with the New Generation V8 Supercar regulations, many of the cars they used in the 2012 Supercars Championship were sold to Dunlop Series teams. Dale Wood won the 2013 series driving a Ford FG Falcon for MW Motorsport; the following teams and drivers competed in the 2013 Dunlop Series: V8 Supercar teams Ford Performance Racing and Walkinshaw Racing will no longer support entries in the Dunlop Series.

Formula Ford team Evans Motorsport Group purchased a Ford Performance Racing-built Ford FG Falcon, run by Rod Nash Racing in the 2012 V8 Supercars Championship. The team merged with Greg Murphy Racing to run two cars in the 2013 series; the combined team will be campaign with a Triple Eight-built Holden VE Commodore alongside their FPR-built Ford FG Falcon. Image Racing purchased the Stone Brothers Racing Ford FG Falcon driven by Shane van Gisbergen in the 2012 V8 Supercars Championship. MW Motorsport purchased the Ford FG Falcons used by Ford Performance Racing's Mark Winterbottom and Will Davison in the 2012 V8 Supercars Championship, expanding the team to three cars. Morgan Haber will be the driver of one of the entries. Family-owned team Novocastrian Motorsport have purchased two Stone Brothers Racing-built Ford FG Falcons. Queensland businessman Maurice Pickering will establish Finance EZI Racing, running two Ford FG Falcons. Tony D'Alberto Racing will expand its operations to include a Dunlop Series entry.

Using the FG Falcon that D'Alberto used in the 2011 and 2012 V8 Supercar Championships. Chris Alajajian will return to the series with Nandi Kiss Racing after a two-year break from competition. Alajajian had contested the Development Series in 2007. Taz Douglas will return to the Dunlop Series after a year racing for Lucas Dumbrell Motorsport in the International V8 Supercars Championship. Andre Heimgartner will move from the Australian Carrera Cup Championship to the Dunlop Series, driving for Finance EZI Racing. Reigning third-tier V8 Supercar champion Josh Hunter will join the series, driving for Finance EZI Racing. Kristian Lindbom will move from Lucas Dumbrell Motorsport to the combined Evans-Murphy team. George Miedecke will move from Sonic Motor Racing Services to Matt Stone Racing. Nick McBride, who contested the 2011 British Formula Ford Championship and 2012 British Formula Three Championship will return to Australia to contest the Dunlop Series, driving for Tony D'Alberto Racing. Chaz Mostert will move from Ford Performance Racing's Dunlop Series team to MW Motorsport.

Nick Percat will leave the Dunlop Series to compete in the Australian Carrera Cup Championship. Chris Pither will leave the V8 Ute Racing Series and return to the Dunlop Series with Brad Jones Racing. Pither competed in the series in 2006 and 2007. Jim Pollicina will run a Holden VE Commodore purchased from Greg Murphy Racing and last raced by Dale Wood in the 2012 series at Barbagallo Raceway. Two-time MotoGP World Champion Casey Stoner will contest the full series schedule, driving a Holden VE Commodore prepared by Triple Eight Race Engineering. Jay Verdnik will return to the category after a three-year hiatus. Cameron Waters will leave Dreamtime Racing, moving to Minda Motorsport, the team that prepared his entry for the 2011 and 2012 Bathurst 1000 races. Sam Walter will return to the Dunlop Series after a three-year absence. Dale Wood will move from Greg Murphy Racing to MW Motorsport; the 2013 Dunlop Series comprised nineteen races within seven rounds at seven circuits, all in support of the International V8 Supercars Championship.

The calendar remains unchanged from the 2012 season, with only the Winton event being brought forward, reflecting the change in the V8 Supercar Championship calendar. Points were awarded to the driver of a car that had completed 75% of the race distance and was running at the completion of the final lap. Two different points scales were applied to rounds having two or three races to ensure that a driver would be awarded 300 points for winning all races at any event. Points were awarded using the following system: 2013 V8 Supercar season

David Kushnir

David Kushnir is an Israeli former Olympic long-jumper. He was born in Afula, is Jewish; when Kushnir competed in the Olympics he weighed 163 lbs. Kushnir won the gold medal in the broad jump at the 1953 Maccabiah Games, he competed for Israel at the 1956 Summer Olympics, at the age of 25, in Melbourne, Australia in the Men's Long Jump, jumped a distance of 6.89 meters, but did not qualify for the finals, came in 25th. Kushnir won the gold medal in the broad jump at the 1957 Maccabiah Games. Kushnir competed for Israel at the 1960 Summer Olympics, at the age of 29, in Rome, Italy, in the Men's Long Jump, jumped 7.20 meters, came in 25th. He won the Israeli Championship in the long jump in 1960, 1961, 1963, 1964. Kushnir coached the Israeli national track and field team from 1970-82. At the 1978 World Veterans Championship, Kushnir won the broad jump. Kushnir played football for Hapoel Balfouria while the club played at the top division, scoring goals for the club in matches against Maccabi Netanya and Hapoel Hadera during the 1954–55 season

Nonlinear Schrödinger equation

In theoretical physics, the nonlinear Schrödinger equation is a nonlinear variation of the Schrödinger equation. It is a classical field equation whose principal applications are to the propagation of light in nonlinear optical fibers and planar waveguides and to Bose-Einstein condensates confined to anisotropic cigar-shaped traps, in the mean-field regime. Additionally, the equation appears in the studies of small-amplitude gravity waves on the surface of deep inviscid water. More the NLSE appears as one of universal equations that describe the evolution of varying packets of quasi-monochromatic waves in weakly nonlinear media that have dispersion. Unlike the linear Schrödinger equation, the NLSE never describes the time evolution of a quantum state; the 1D NLSE is an example of an integrable model. In quantum mechanics, the 1D NLSE is a special case of the classical nonlinear Schrödinger field, which in turn is a classical limit of a quantum Schrödinger field. Conversely, when the classical Schrödinger field is canonically quantized, it becomes a quantum field theory that describes bosonic point particles with delta-function interactions — the particles either repel or attract when they are at the same point.

In fact, when the number of particles is finite, this quantum field theory is equivalent to the Lieb–Liniger model. Both the quantum and the classical 1D nonlinear Schrödinger equations are integrable. Of special interest is the limit of infinite strength repulsion, in which case the Lieb–Liniger model becomes the Tonks–Girardeau gas. In this limit, the bosons may, by a change of variables, a continuum generalization of the Jordan–Wigner transformation, be transformed to a system one-dimensional noninteracting spinless fermions; the nonlinear Schrödinger equation is a simplified 1+1-dimensional form of the Ginzburg–Landau equation introduced in 1950 in their work on superconductivity, was written down explicitly by R. Y. Chiao, E. Garmire, C. H. Townes in their study of optical beams. Multi-dimensional version replaces the second spatial derivative by the Laplacian. In more than one dimension, the equation is not integrable, it allows for a collapse and wave turbulence; the nonlinear Schrödinger equation is a nonlinear partial differential equation, applicable to classical and quantum mechanics.

The classical field equation is: for the complex field ψ. This equation arises from the Hamiltonian H = ∫ d x with the Poisson brackets = = 0 = i δ. Unlike its linear counterpart, it never describes the time evolution of a quantum state; the case with negative κ is called focusing and allows for bright soliton solutions as well as breather solutions. It can be solved by use of the inverse scattering transform, as shown by Zakharov & Shabat; the other case, with κ positive, is the defocusing NLS. To get the quantized version replace the Poisson brackets by commutators = = 0 = − δ and normal order the Hamiltonian H = ∫ d x [ 1 2 ∂ x ψ † ∂ x