Imperial Crown of Brazil

The Imperial Crown of Brazil known as the Crown of Dom Pedro II or as the Diamantine Crown, is the Crown manufactured for the second Brazilian Emperor, Pedro II. With the addition of this Crown to the Brazilian Imperial Regalia, use of the previous, simpler Crown of Pedro I was abandoned; the design of the Crown of Dom Pedro II replaced the design of the older diadem in flag and coat of arms of the Brazilian Empire, thus making the new Crown the official imperial Crown of the State. The Crown of Dom Pedro I was simpler, having been manufactured in 1822 for the Coronation of Brazil's first emperor, just a few months after the declaration of the country's independence; when Brazil's second emperor, Pedro II, was declared of age and preparations for his coronation began, the government saw the need to commission the manufacturing of a new crown. The Crown of Dom Pedro II was created by the goldsmith Carlos Martin in Rio de Janeiro, was first exhibited to the public on July 8, 1841, just days before the new monarch's Coronation that took place on July 18 of the same year.

The crown's frame is made of quality 18 carat gold. Its circlet base supports eight imperial semi-arches, connected at the top by a golden monde, which in turn is surmounted by a jeweled cross, forming a globus cruciger. Inside the half-arches lies a dark-green velvet cap; the crown is set with 639 precious stones, 77 pearls of 8 millimeters each. This crown has a diameter of 20.5 centimetres and is 31 centimetres high. It is considered one of the most splendid works of Brazilian jewelry. Aside from the Coronation Mass, it was customary for Brazilian emperors to wear their crowns only twice a year, for the ceremonies of opening and closing the session of the Brazilian Imperial Parliament, when the emperor appeared in full regalia to deliver his Speech from the Throne. Upon the abolition of the monarchy in 1889, the government of the newly proclaimed republic took possession of all items of the Imperial Regalia, unlike what happened upon the abolition of other monarchies, no item of the Crown Jewels was sold or destroyed.

Since 1943, the Imperial Crown of Brazil and all other items of the regalia have been kept on permanent public exhibition at the Imperial Palace in the City of Petrópolis, now converted to the Imperial Museum of Brazil. Before the opening of the Imperial Museum in 1943, the Imperial Crown and other items of the Brazilian Crown Jewels were kept under lock and key in possession of the Department of the Treasury; the Imperial Crown is the property of the Brazilian State. In the first years of the 21st century, Brazilian Jewellers Amsterdam Sauer created a replica of the original Imperial Crown of D. Pedro II; the creation of the replica, using 19th-century techniques, took 18 months. The replica is on display at Amsterdam Sauer's Museum of Gemstones and Rare Minerals in Ipanema, Rio de Janeiro; the replica is larger than the original crown. It weighs 2.77 kilograms and is set with 596 stones totaling 911.84 carats

Anarchy, State, and Utopia

Anarchy and Utopia is a 1974 book by the American political philosopher Robert Nozick. It won the 1975 US National Book Award in category Philosophy and Religion, has been translated into 11 languages, was named one of the "100 most influential books since the war" by the UK Times Literary Supplement. In opposition to A Theory of Justice by John Rawls, in debate with Michael Walzer, Nozick argues in favor of a minimal state, "limited to the narrow functions of protection against force, fraud, enforcement of contracts, so on." When a state takes on more responsibilities than these, Nozick argues, rights will be violated. To support the idea of the minimal state, Nozick presents an argument that illustrates how the minimalist state arises from anarchy and how any expansion of state power past this minimalist threshold is unjustified. Nozick's entitlement theory, which sees humans as ends in themselves and justifies redistribution of goods only on condition of consent, is a key aspect of Anarchy and Utopia.

It is influenced by John Locke, Immanuel Kant, Friedrich Hayek. The book contains a vigorous defense of minarchist libertarianism against more extreme views, such as anarcho-capitalism. Nozick argues that anarcho-capitalism would transform into a minarchist state without violating any of its own non-aggression principles, through the eventual emergence of a single locally dominant private defense and judicial agency that it is in everyone's interests to align with, because other agencies are unable to compete against the advantages of the agency with majority coverage; therefore to the extent that the anarcho-capitalist theory is correct, it results in a single, protective agency, itself a de facto "state". Thus anarcho-capitalism may only exist for a limited period; the preface of Anarchy and Utopia contains a passage about "the usual manner of presenting philosophical work"—i.e. its presentation as though it were the final word on its subject. Nozick believes that philosophers are more modest than that and aware of their works' weaknesses.

Yet a form of philosophical activity persists which "feels like pushing and shoving things to fit into some fixed perimeter of specified shape." The bulges are masked or the cause of the bulge is thrown far away so that no one will notice. "Quickly, you find an angle from which everything appears to fit and take a snapshot, at a fast shutter speed before something else bulges out too noticeably." After a trip to the darkroom for touching up, "ll that remains is to publish the photograph as a representation of how things are, to note how nothing fits properly into any other shape." So how does Nozick's work differ from this form of activity? He believed that what he said was correct, but he doesn't mask the bulges: "the doubts and worries and uncertainties as well as the beliefs and arguments." In this chapter Nozick tries to explain why investigating a Lockean state of nature is useful in order to understand whether there should be a state in the first place. If one can show that an anarchic society is worse than one that has a state we should choose the second as the less bad alternative.

To convincingly compare the two, he argues, one should focus not on an pessimistic nor on an optimistic view of that society. Instead, one should: focus upon a nonstate situation in which people satisfy moral constraints and act as they ought this state-of-nature situation is the best anarchic situation one reasonably could hope for. Hence investigating its nature and defects is of crucial importance to deciding whether there should be a state rather than anarchy. Nozick's plan is to first describe the morally permissible and impermissible actions in such a non-political society and how violations of those constraints by some individuals would lead to the emergence of a state. If that would happen, it would explain the appearance if no state developed in that particular way, he gestures towards the biggest bulge when he notes the shallowness of his "invisible hand" explanation of the minimal state, deriving it from a Lockean state of nature, in which there are individual rights but no state to enforce and adjudicate them.

Although this counts for him as a "fundamental explanation" of the political realm because the political is explained in terms of the nonpolitical, it is shallow relative to his "genealogical" ambition to explain both the political and the moral by reference to beneficial cooperative practices that can be traced back to our hunter-gatherer ancestors and beyond. The genealogy will give Nozick an explanation of what is only assumed in Anarchy and Utopia: the fundamental status of individual rights. Creativity was not a factor in his interpretation. Nozick starts this chapter by summarizing some of the features of the Lockean state of nature. An important one is that every individual has a right to exact compensation by himself whenever another individual violates his rights. Punishing the offender is acceptable, but only inasmuch as he will be prevented from doing that again; as Locke himself acknowledges, this raises several problems, Nozick is going to try to see to what extent can they be solved by voluntary arrangements.

A rational response to the "troubles" of a Lockean state of nature is the establishment of mutual-protection associations, in which all will answer the call of any member. It is inconvenien


Octadecyltrichlorosilane is an organometallic chemical. It is used in semiconductor industry to form self-assembled monolayer thin films on silicon dioxide substrates, its structural chemical formula is CH317SiCl3. It is flammable, reacts with water, is sensitive to air, it is corrosive and can damage mucous membranes. Its EINECS number is 203-930-7. Octadecyltrichlorosilane is an amphiphilic molecule consisting of a long-chain alkyl group and a polar head group, which forms Self assembled monolayers on various oxidic substrates. ODTS finds its use in molecular electronics, as thin insulating gates in Metal-Insulator-Semiconductor Field-Effect Transistors. Dodecyltrichlorosilane, an ODTS analog with shorter alkyl chain, is used for the same purpose as well. ODTS-PVP films are used in organic-substrate LCD displays