What Element in the Halide Family is a Liquid

Only one halide element is a liquid at room temperature and pressure. Do you know what it is? Although chlorine can be seen as a yellow liquid, this occurs only at low temperature or else increased pressure. The only halide element that is a liquid at ordinary room temperature and pressure is bromine. In fact, bromine is the only nonmetal that is a liquid under these conditions. A halide is a compound where at least one of the atoms belongs to the halogen element group. Because of their high reactivity, halogens are not found free in nature as single atoms, but they do bind to their own atoms to form halides. Examples of these halides are Cl2, I2, Br2. Fluorine and chlorine are gases. Bromine is a liquid. Iodine and astatine are solids. Although insufficient atoms have been produced to know for sure, scientists predict element 117 (tennessine) will also form a solid under ordinary conditions. Aside from bromine, the only other element on the periodic table that is a liquid at room temperature and pressure is mercury. While bromine, as a halogen, is a type of nonmetal. Mercury is a metal.

Paglilitis Ni Mang Serapio Sa Mata Ni Aristotle - 1638 Words

Paglilitis ni Mang Serapio is a play written by Paul Dumol, currently an Economics professor at the University of Asia and the Pacific, during his high school years at Ateneo de Manila University. This play has been staged by countless theatre organizations already, producing myriad of interpretations and dramatizations. However, probably one thing has been constant in each of them since it was instilled in the text itself – that Paglilitis ni Mang Serapio is a tragedy. So with that, we can assume that Paglilitis ni Mang Serapio is not comedy. Before proving the claim that it is a tragedy, first, I would like to emphasize why it is not comedy. As a director in theatre and of this play, specifically, I received a lot of negative feedbacks†¦show more content†¦If its â€Å"magnitude† is to be considered, Paglilitis ni Mang Serapio possesses such for its complexity through absurdity is enough proof and its â€Å"seriousness† was obviously shown - then again the most distinct proof of its magnitude is what Aristotle termed as â€Å"universal significance†. This play was written more than 4 decades ago and still, its influence to readers and mere students is continuously affecting them – us. The fact that it is still alive means its message is never old, not only for the theatre people but also for the audience. Second, the Character. The development of emotions was previously discussed already. The argument stated only proved that the character supported the plot. The only contradicting part of Aristotle’s argument and Paglilitis ni Mang Serapio is the description on the protagonist. According to Aristotle, â€Å"The protagonist should be renowned and prosperous, so his change of fortune can be from good to bad.† Serapio, on the other hand, entered as someone who is definitely not â€Å"renowned and prosperous† but nevertheless, the aimed peripitea (a reversal of fortune; dramatic downfall) was still attained. In my interpretation, however, in Paglilitis ni Mang Serapio, it is not the protagonist who achieved this but the all the other characters especially the Unang Tagapagtanong. Yes, pity for Serapio’s fate was truly shown in the latter part but it was in

Martin Luther King and Malcolm X Free Essays

Savannah Major February 23, 2013 Hon. English/ H. 3 Philosophies of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X The late 1950s to mid-1960s was a time when violence and injustice had reached its peak. We will write a custom essay sample on Martin Luther King and Malcolm X or any similar topic only for you Order Now Many people were treated unfairly and the mood of the country overall was very gloomy and unhappy. Martin Luther King and Malcolm X were both very well-known activists who fought to make things equal and right. 80th activists shared similar beliefs against the racial Injustice brought against African Americans by whites although their methods of achieving that equality were completely different. MLK, for Instance, believed In approaching things in a peaceful, nonviolent fashion. However, most African Americans felt that his â€Å"peaceful approach† wasn’t enough to reach his. as well as their, goals and turned to Malcolm X, who believed that arming up against whites was a necessity in order to protect yourself. In other words, fight violence with violence. In the speech, â€Å"Stride Toward Freedom,† MLK discusses the three different ways of dealing with oppression; acquiescence, resorting to violence, and the use of nonviolent resistance. Only supporting one of the three, nonviolence, King strongly isagrees with both acquiescence and using violence as a way of making peace. Acquiescence, when the oppressed resign to their oppression and just deal with it. giving up on it all together. MLK believes that is not the way out, claiming that by resigning â€Å"the oppressed become as evil as the oppressor. † (King 301) The second form of oppression, resorting to physical violence, completely goes against his views. How to cite Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, Papers