Leyden jar

A Leyden jar is an antique electrical component which stores a high-voltage electric charge between electrical conductors on the inside and outside of a glass jar. It consists of a glass jar with metal foil cemented to the inside and the outside surfaces, a metal terminal projecting vertically through the jar lid to make contact with the inner foil, it was the original form of the capacitor. Its invention was a discovery made independently by German cleric Ewald Georg von Kleist on 11 October 1745 and by Dutch scientist Pieter van Musschenbroek of Leiden in 1745–1746; the invention was named after the city. The Leyden jar was used to conduct many early experiments in electricity, its discovery was of fundamental importance in the study of electrostatics, it was the first means of accumulating and preserving electric charge in large quantities that could be discharged at the experimenter's will, thus overcoming a significant limit to early research into electrical conduction. Leyden jars are still used in education to demonstrate the principles of electrostatics.

The Ancient Greeks knew that pieces of amber could attract lightweight particles after being rubbed. The amber becomes electrified by triboelectric effect, mechanical separation of charge in a dielectric; the Greek word for amber is ἤλεκτρον and is the origin of the word "electricity". Around 1650, Otto von Guericke built a crude electrostatic generator: a sulphur ball that rotated on a shaft; when Guericke held his hand against the ball and turned the shaft a static electric charge built up. This experiment inspired the development of several forms of "friction machines", that helped in the study of electricity; the Leyden jar was discovered independently by two parties: German deacon Ewald Georg von Kleist, who made the first discovery, Dutch scientists Pieter van Musschenbroek and Andreas Cunaeus, who figured out how it worked only when held in the hand. The Leyden jar is a high voltage device; the center rod electrode has a metal ball on the end to prevent leakage of the charge into the air by corona discharge.

It was first used in electrostatics experiments, in high voltage equipment such as spark gap radio transmitters and electrotherapy machines. Ewald Georg von Kleist discovered the immense storage capability of the Leyden jar while working under a theory that saw electricity as a fluid, hoped a glass jar filled with alcohol would "capture" this fluid, he was the deacon at the cathedral of Camin in Pomerania. In October 1745 von Kleist tried to accumulate electricity in a small medicine bottle filled with alcohol with a nail inserted in the cork, he was following up on an experiment developed by Georg Matthias Bose where electricity had been sent through water to set alcoholic spirits alight. He attempted to charge the bottle from a large prime conductor suspended above his friction machine. Kleist was convinced that a substantial electric charge could be collected and held within the glass which he knew would provide an obstacle to the escape of the'fluid', he received a significant shock from the device when he accidentally touched the nail through the cork while still cradling the bottle in his other hand.

He communicated his results to at least five different electrical experimenters, in several letters from November 1745 to March 1746, but did not receive any confirmation that they had repeated his results, until April 1746. Daniel Gralath learned about Kleist's experiment from seeing the letter to Paul Swietlicki, written in November 1745. After Gralath's failed first attempt to reproduce the experiment in December 1745, he wrote to Kleist for more information. Gralath succeeded in getting the intended effect on 5 March 1746, holding a small glass medicine bottle with a nail inside in one hand, moving it close to an electrostatic generator, moving the other hand close to the nail. Kleist didn't understand the significance of his conducting hand holding the bottle—and both he and his correspondents were loath to hold the device when told that the shock could throw them across the room, it took some time before Kleist's student associates at Leyden worked out that the hand provided an essential element.

The Leyden jar's invention was long credited to Pieter van Musschenbroek, the physics professor at University of Leiden, who ran a family foundry which cast brass cannonettes, a small business which made scientific and medical instruments for the new university courses in physics and for scientific gentlemen keen to establish their own'cabinets' of curiosities and instruments. Like Kleist, Musschenbroek was interested in and attempting to repeat Bose's experiment. During this time, Andreas Cunaeus, a lawyer, came to learn about this experiment from visiting Musschenbroek's laboratory and Cunaeus attempted to duplicate the experiment at home with household items. Using a glass of beer, Cunaeus was unable to make it work. Cunaeus was the first to discover that the experimental setup could deliver a severe shock when he held his jar in his hand while charging it rather than placing it on an insulated stand, not realising, the standard practice, thus making himself part of the circuit, he reported his experience to Allamand, Musschenbroek's colleague.

Allamand and Musschenbroek received severe shocks. Musschenbroek communicated the experiment in a letter from 20 January 1746 to René Antoine Ferchault de Réaumur, w


In grammar, a supine is a form of verbal noun used in some languages. The term is most used for Latin, where it is one of the four principal parts of a verb; the word refers to a position of lying on one's back, but there exists no accepted etymology that explains why or how the term came to be used to describe this form of a verb. There are two supines, I and II, they are the accusative and dative or ablative forms of a verbal noun in the fourth declension, respectively. The first supine ends in -um, it has two uses. The first supine comes with verbs of motion. In one usage, it indicates purpose. For example, "mater pompam me spectatum duxit" is Latin for "Mother took me to watch the procession", "legati ad Caesarem gratulatum convenerunt" is Latin for "Ambassadors came to Caesar to congratulate him"; the translation of this first usage of the first supine is similar to, if not identical to, the Latin clause of purpose. A second usage is in combination with the future passive infinitive. In this second usage it indicates fate.

It appears in indirect statements, for example "occisum iri a Milone video", meaning "I foresee that he is going to be killed by Milo". The second supine, which comes with adjectives, is used, it is derived from the dative of purpose, which expresses the purpose of a thing or action, or the ablative of respect, which can translate as "with regard/respect to" and is used to indicate to what extent or in what way the main clause is true. It is the same as the first supine but replacing final -um by -ū, with a lengthened u. Mirabile dictū, for example, translates as "amazing to say", where dictū is the supine form; the sense is passive if not explicitly marked as such in idiomatic English translation. In English grammar, the term "supine" is sometimes used to refer to the to-infinitive; the to-infinitive is seen in sentences. In Swedish, the supine is used with an auxiliary verb to produce some compound verb forms. See Swedish grammar. In Icelandic grammar, sagnbót is a verbal form identical to the neuter participle, used to form certain verb tenses.

In Estonian, the supine is called "ma-tegevusnimi" because all the words in supine have "ma" in the end, they act to the Latin example. The supine is the common dictionary form for verbs. In Romanian, the supine corresponds to an English construction like for doing: "Această carte este de citit" means "This book is for reading"; the Slovene and the Lower Sorbian supine is used after verbs of movement. The supine was used in Proto-Slavic but it was replaced in most Slavic languages by the infinitive in periods. In some dialects of Lithuanian, the supine is used with verbs of motion to indicate purpose: Moterys eina miestan duonos pirktų, which means "The women are going to the town to buy some bread"; the standard language uses the infinitive, instead of the supine. In the past, the supine was much more widespread form than now. Gerund Non-finite verb

Mahmud Taghiyev

Mahmud Taghiyev was an Azerbaijani painter, Honored Art Worker of the Azerbaijan SSR. Mahmud Taghiyev was born on June 1923 in Baku. After graduating from Azerbaijan State School of Art in 1941, he studied at All-Union State Institute of Cinematography in Moscow, in 1949–1953, studied at the Leningrad Institute of Art and Architecture named after I. E. Repin in 1953–1956. Mahmud Taghiyev was married to painter Khalida Safarova in 1946 and had been a member of the Union of Artists of Azerbaijan since that year, he died on November 2001 in Baku. The main themes of Mahmud Taghiyev's early creativity are still landscape paintings, he had been researching agricultural topics since the 1960s. The artist described the main points of the construction of Soviet buildings in Azerbaijan; these include descriptions of the Mingachevir Sumgait Aluminum Plant. M. Taghiyev had continued to explore portrait genre during these years and had appealed to the historical portrait genre."Apricots", "Figs", "Balcony", "Still Life", "Spring Flowers", "Tulips", "Apples", "Majnun", "Leyli", "Flowers in the vase", "Spring in the mountains", "Baku", "Oil refinery plant lights", "Avarchakan", "Sleep", "Naked", "Dada Gorgud", "Samad Vurgun", "Seven beautiful" are famous works of the painter.

Taghiyev's exhibitions were held in Baku, in Moscow. His works have been exhibited in Russia, Ukraine, United States, UK, Germany, Iran and Egypt. Brother of Taghi Taghiyev Father of Akram Taghiyev Husband of Khalida Safarova Honored Art Worker of the Azerbaijan SSR — 1 December 1982 Diploma of the 1st Biennial of the Transcaucasian Republics — 1986 3rd prize at the Contest of "Contemporary Art in Azerbaijan" — 1996