Materials project reflection
In this project I have found that materials, despite their obvious scientific nature are excellent tools for seeing the reasons behind our past, present, and even give us an inclination of out future. Materials, specifically the chemistry of said materials are the driving force of innovation, our knowledge of them tells us what is, and is not yet possible. Carbon in recent years, has allowed us to create carbon fiber, but also (literally) fueled the fires of the industrial revolution. In my own project, I explored the historical significance of the magnification property of glass. Even at level of broadness, as you can see in my article, I found more to talk about than would fit inside of the word limit. Magnification allowed us to create telescopes, microscopes, and glasses; It's pretty important once you consider the implications of those inventions. Even in a material as old as glass, innovation is still being done; when we imagine glass today we see a frail brittle material, however even this is currently being challenged.
I found it incredible how something as small as the structure of an atom can determine not only the nature of a material, but also directly influence how we use said material what magnification is to glass, conduction is to copper. Glass, being a covalently structured amorphous atom is well suited to be shaped by heat. Copper on the other hand is a ionic compound, this is what allows it to conduct electricity so well. As we discover more material properties we bend the rules on what is and is not possible. Knowledge of iron-working changed the history of the ancient world, just as today it fuels the world of construction. Whats truly important in the scope of all of this, is not to look at even given material simply as "what it is" but as a living history of what has been and what can be.
I found it incredible how something as small as the structure of an atom can determine not only the nature of a material, but also directly influence how we use said material what magnification is to glass, conduction is to copper. Glass, being a covalently structured amorphous atom is well suited to be shaped by heat. Copper on the other hand is a ionic compound, this is what allows it to conduct electricity so well. As we discover more material properties we bend the rules on what is and is not possible. Knowledge of iron-working changed the history of the ancient world, just as today it fuels the world of construction. Whats truly important in the scope of all of this, is not to look at even given material simply as "what it is" but as a living history of what has been and what can be.
Materials project article
Glass and the Scientific Revolution
OR, how magnification charted the course of human history
ON
Slightly hazy, in need of cleaning; legible, obtuse… necessary
OFF
Fuzzy, not unlike a fur blanket… but to touch, this is not true
If, like myself, you wear glasses you probably understood that right away; If not, you just learned.
Magnification is a pretty incredible thing, we use it to understand the fabric of the cosmos, worlds smaller than we can see, or simply to see the world as any other person would. In order to function these tools share a commonality: a lens of glass. Glass, through-out human history has garnered many uses. Rather than explain them all I would ask you, my reader, simply to imagine a world without it.
Without glass we would have no glass window; that alone renders countless inventions ineffective. We would have no internally operated vehicles, no automobiles, planes would likely be impossible. Transportation as we know it would creep along at the pace of a horse and buggy, come to think of it that’s likely how we would get around.
But enough of that, this article exists for only one property of glass, which as I’m sure you’ve seen already is magnification.
In the world of material properties, glass and magnification walk hand and hand. Magnification is based around the ability to focus and refract light. While many materials can accomplish this, glass is still the only known material to do it affectively and consistently. Glass’s ability to refract light is centric to its covalent molecular structure, and therefore amorphous nature. Basically, you can shape it however you want. Glass is also useful for its transparency, therefore the lens it shapes can be looked through by the human eye.
To this day the most efficient lenses for magnification are concave and convex. As a matter of fact, the first useful telescope, created by Galileo Galilei, utilized these two simple features. Galileo had an understanding that a concave lens would bend light inward, and a convex lens would bend it outward again. His telescope began with a oval shaped convex lens. The convex lens bends the light into a cone shaped beam. This light hits the center of the concave lens at the end of the telescope. A convex lens is shaped like a cylinder with bowls carved on the would be flat ends. This reverse oval shape disperses the light that hits it in every direction. This creates what we would now call a fish-eye lens.
Through the combined magnification abilities of his two lenses, Galileo was able to create a magnification that was twenty times more powerful than the human eye. Armed with a powerful new tool, Galileo turned his attention to the heavens. As he made note of the heavens he began to observe things, most importantly that other planets, had moons. In his time this was incredibly significant. The Catholic church, which at the time held sway over most of of Europe, had educated all Catholics to believe in the Aristotelian Geo-centric model of the universe. This was the belief that the heavens, all planets and stars, revolved around the earth. The observation that other planets had objects revolving around them instead supported what would later come to be known as the Copernican Helio-centric (Sun centered) model of the universe.
He published his findings in his book, The Starry Messenger. As you might guess, the all-powerful Papacy had more than a slight issue with this. Convicting Galileo, of heresy they banned his book, placed him under house arrest, and forbid him to share his findings with anyone. Galileo, being a devout Catholic himself, obeyed… initially. While under house arrest he continued to observe the heavens and wrote two more books on the subject. Following his death in 1642, his assistant published the books. These books too were banned but not before Galileo’s writings inspired following generations to look at the stars. Four scientists later in 1758, the Papacy could no longer deny the obvious; the ban on the Helio-centric model was lifted.
Between then and now, we’ve kept looking at the heavens. We have taken launched our own objects into orbit, taken photography of space, and even sent men to the moon. However, magnification means much more than just telescopes. In the world we live in the micro can be just as important as the macro.
Unlike the telescope, the microscope has allowed us to see our own world in a new way. Not long after Galileo began looking at the stars, in 1665, Robert Hooke discovered cells by observing cork samples with a microscope. In the late nineteenth century these cells had begun to take on much more notice, and cell theory was established; Ever since, cells the most basic unit of life have done wonders to help us understand the biology of the world we live in. From DNA to insulin producing bacteria, we discovered it with a microscope and a lens of glass.
While the entire scope of how glass influenced scientific progress would take ages to explain (pun intended), I hope that my article has given you some understanding of just how significant it’s been. Still, that’s not even the whole story; glass continues to be innovated in mysterious and fantastic ways. Magnification, while incredible, is but one of the properties that make glass so incredible. A company called Corning manufactures glass that bends! Glass, not plastic; the difference allows for some pretty fantastic properties. Because I lack space to describe them in detail I would encourage you my reader to research them on your own. With that, I bid you adieu.
Sources:
http://www.olympusmicro.com/primer/anatomy/magnification.html
http://galileo.rice.edu/sci/instruments/telescope.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei
http://amazing-space.stsci.edu/resources/explorations/groundup/lesson/glossary/term-full.php?t=concave_vs_convex
OR, how magnification charted the course of human history
ON
Slightly hazy, in need of cleaning; legible, obtuse… necessary
OFF
Fuzzy, not unlike a fur blanket… but to touch, this is not true
If, like myself, you wear glasses you probably understood that right away; If not, you just learned.
Magnification is a pretty incredible thing, we use it to understand the fabric of the cosmos, worlds smaller than we can see, or simply to see the world as any other person would. In order to function these tools share a commonality: a lens of glass. Glass, through-out human history has garnered many uses. Rather than explain them all I would ask you, my reader, simply to imagine a world without it.
Without glass we would have no glass window; that alone renders countless inventions ineffective. We would have no internally operated vehicles, no automobiles, planes would likely be impossible. Transportation as we know it would creep along at the pace of a horse and buggy, come to think of it that’s likely how we would get around.
But enough of that, this article exists for only one property of glass, which as I’m sure you’ve seen already is magnification.
In the world of material properties, glass and magnification walk hand and hand. Magnification is based around the ability to focus and refract light. While many materials can accomplish this, glass is still the only known material to do it affectively and consistently. Glass’s ability to refract light is centric to its covalent molecular structure, and therefore amorphous nature. Basically, you can shape it however you want. Glass is also useful for its transparency, therefore the lens it shapes can be looked through by the human eye.
To this day the most efficient lenses for magnification are concave and convex. As a matter of fact, the first useful telescope, created by Galileo Galilei, utilized these two simple features. Galileo had an understanding that a concave lens would bend light inward, and a convex lens would bend it outward again. His telescope began with a oval shaped convex lens. The convex lens bends the light into a cone shaped beam. This light hits the center of the concave lens at the end of the telescope. A convex lens is shaped like a cylinder with bowls carved on the would be flat ends. This reverse oval shape disperses the light that hits it in every direction. This creates what we would now call a fish-eye lens.
Through the combined magnification abilities of his two lenses, Galileo was able to create a magnification that was twenty times more powerful than the human eye. Armed with a powerful new tool, Galileo turned his attention to the heavens. As he made note of the heavens he began to observe things, most importantly that other planets, had moons. In his time this was incredibly significant. The Catholic church, which at the time held sway over most of of Europe, had educated all Catholics to believe in the Aristotelian Geo-centric model of the universe. This was the belief that the heavens, all planets and stars, revolved around the earth. The observation that other planets had objects revolving around them instead supported what would later come to be known as the Copernican Helio-centric (Sun centered) model of the universe.
He published his findings in his book, The Starry Messenger. As you might guess, the all-powerful Papacy had more than a slight issue with this. Convicting Galileo, of heresy they banned his book, placed him under house arrest, and forbid him to share his findings with anyone. Galileo, being a devout Catholic himself, obeyed… initially. While under house arrest he continued to observe the heavens and wrote two more books on the subject. Following his death in 1642, his assistant published the books. These books too were banned but not before Galileo’s writings inspired following generations to look at the stars. Four scientists later in 1758, the Papacy could no longer deny the obvious; the ban on the Helio-centric model was lifted.
Between then and now, we’ve kept looking at the heavens. We have taken launched our own objects into orbit, taken photography of space, and even sent men to the moon. However, magnification means much more than just telescopes. In the world we live in the micro can be just as important as the macro.
Unlike the telescope, the microscope has allowed us to see our own world in a new way. Not long after Galileo began looking at the stars, in 1665, Robert Hooke discovered cells by observing cork samples with a microscope. In the late nineteenth century these cells had begun to take on much more notice, and cell theory was established; Ever since, cells the most basic unit of life have done wonders to help us understand the biology of the world we live in. From DNA to insulin producing bacteria, we discovered it with a microscope and a lens of glass.
While the entire scope of how glass influenced scientific progress would take ages to explain (pun intended), I hope that my article has given you some understanding of just how significant it’s been. Still, that’s not even the whole story; glass continues to be innovated in mysterious and fantastic ways. Magnification, while incredible, is but one of the properties that make glass so incredible. A company called Corning manufactures glass that bends! Glass, not plastic; the difference allows for some pretty fantastic properties. Because I lack space to describe them in detail I would encourage you my reader to research them on your own. With that, I bid you adieu.
Sources:
http://www.olympusmicro.com/primer/anatomy/magnification.html
http://galileo.rice.edu/sci/instruments/telescope.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_Galilei
http://amazing-space.stsci.edu/resources/explorations/groundup/lesson/glossary/term-full.php?t=concave_vs_convex
materials project elevator pitch
To begin my pitch to you today, I’d like to read to you a short passage for my upcoming book: Glass & the Scientific Revolution.
ON
Slightly hazy, in need of cleaning; legible, obtuse… necessary
OFF
Fuzzy, not unlike a fur blanket… but to touch, this is not true
If, like myself, you wear glasses you probably understood that right away. If not, know this: As little as a millimeter of glass can make all the difference in the world. Without it, many people myself included, would be pretty hopeless.
Still, as I can plainly see, not very many of you are wearing glasses!
So instead, I’d implore you, my audience to simply imagine a world without glass- No bottles, lightbulbs, or even windows. We would have no windshields! That alone renders most modern transportation useless.
So very many inventions hinge upon glass. Inventions themselves which have literally changed the way we see the would- I’m not just talking about glasses.
I’ve written my first chapter on the magnification property of glass. How with it, humanity has discovered worlds just beyond the edge of our vision. Be it galaxies far far away, or the invisible world of cells just at our fingertips, glass is what made those discoveries and much more, possible.
This is magnification, and it is just one of many of the extraordinary properties of glass, properties that we’re still discovering today! In my book, Glass and the Scientific revolution, I explore these features, and how through its innovation, we have shaped the course human history.
If you my audience are interested in the history, future, or even chemistry of glass- I would implore you to help finance the odyssey of one of the world’s coolest materials.
ON
Slightly hazy, in need of cleaning; legible, obtuse… necessary
OFF
Fuzzy, not unlike a fur blanket… but to touch, this is not true
If, like myself, you wear glasses you probably understood that right away. If not, know this: As little as a millimeter of glass can make all the difference in the world. Without it, many people myself included, would be pretty hopeless.
Still, as I can plainly see, not very many of you are wearing glasses!
So instead, I’d implore you, my audience to simply imagine a world without glass- No bottles, lightbulbs, or even windows. We would have no windshields! That alone renders most modern transportation useless.
So very many inventions hinge upon glass. Inventions themselves which have literally changed the way we see the would- I’m not just talking about glasses.
I’ve written my first chapter on the magnification property of glass. How with it, humanity has discovered worlds just beyond the edge of our vision. Be it galaxies far far away, or the invisible world of cells just at our fingertips, glass is what made those discoveries and much more, possible.
This is magnification, and it is just one of many of the extraordinary properties of glass, properties that we’re still discovering today! In my book, Glass and the Scientific revolution, I explore these features, and how through its innovation, we have shaped the course human history.
If you my audience are interested in the history, future, or even chemistry of glass- I would implore you to help finance the odyssey of one of the world’s coolest materials.
Energy and place
Essential Questions:
How does energy production and consumption impact place?
How does your sense of place, environmental ethic and understanding of our energy needs
influence your perception and decisions relating to energy production and consumption?
How does energy production and consumption impact place?
How does your sense of place, environmental ethic and understanding of our energy needs
influence your perception and decisions relating to energy production and consumption?
The Shielding of Beta Radiation
By Philip Wiley and, Ian Duthie
Animas High School
By Philip Wiley and, Ian Duthie
Animas High School
Abstract:
The motivation behind the lab test was to determine which common household substance was the most effective at shielding radiation. Lead was also tested along with the more common materials in an effort to determine a reference point for what effective radiation shielding would look like. It was hypothesized that lead would be the most effective shielding material, it was not- instead what was hypothesized to be the weakest shielding material, cotton fabric, was by far the most effective. Despite the conclusive results, the validity of the experiment is still doubted for a number of reasons. The sizes of the shielding materials were not standardized which led to the corruption of the quantitative beta absorption data.
Introduction:
Radiation and the shielding thereof is an issue of increasing importance in our modern world. Increased doses of radiation can come from X-rays, plane flights, and even from where one lives. All of these and many others different sources emit different types of radiation including alpha, beta, and gamma radiations. Gamma decay releases photons or light particles, Alpha decay releases alpha particles consisting of protons and neutrons, and Beta decay causes neutrons or protons to transform into the other; this particular process then goes on to release charged electrons.
There is also Nuclear radiation, which is the type emitted by nuclear power plants. Neutrons are released through this type of nuclear reaction. Beta decay radiation is the type used in this experiment. Since the particles released through nuclear radiation are a size between Alpha and Beta radiation it was thought that materials that proved effective in blocking the Beta might also prove to do the same with the neutrons released from nuclear power use.
Common household substances that were tested included wood, a cotton-polyester blend, lead, cardboard, acrylic, and polyurethane. Of these substances, it was hypothesized that lead would be the most effective shield while; the cotton-polyester blend would be the least effective for use as shielding. The effectiveness of the shielding is defined as the amount of beta radiation absorbed by the shield.
Hazards:
Students worked with radioactive substances and were thus slightly exposed, however to prevent and negative effects, the radioactive substances were encased in a protective material and handled with tweezers. A very minute amount of the radioactive substance was used and, when not in use, it was stored in a lead tube. Because of these precautions only a dose of 1.57E-007 millirems per hour.
Methods:
The purpose of this experiment was to test household substances for the property of radiation shielding. For the purpose of this, a source of beta radiation, Strontium-90, was used. This radiation source was consistently placed ten centimeters away from the Geiger counter used to measure the number of radioactive particles that breached the shielding used. As a control, no shielding was used. After that, lead, wood, plastic, cardboard, acrylic, and a cotton-polyester blend were tested for their ability to block beta radiation by being placed approximately five centimeters between the source and the Geiger counter. Each then endured a fifty-second testing period.
Results and Discussion: Figure 1: Figure 2:
The motivation behind the lab test was to determine which common household substance was the most effective at shielding radiation. Lead was also tested along with the more common materials in an effort to determine a reference point for what effective radiation shielding would look like. It was hypothesized that lead would be the most effective shielding material, it was not- instead what was hypothesized to be the weakest shielding material, cotton fabric, was by far the most effective. Despite the conclusive results, the validity of the experiment is still doubted for a number of reasons. The sizes of the shielding materials were not standardized which led to the corruption of the quantitative beta absorption data.
Introduction:
Radiation and the shielding thereof is an issue of increasing importance in our modern world. Increased doses of radiation can come from X-rays, plane flights, and even from where one lives. All of these and many others different sources emit different types of radiation including alpha, beta, and gamma radiations. Gamma decay releases photons or light particles, Alpha decay releases alpha particles consisting of protons and neutrons, and Beta decay causes neutrons or protons to transform into the other; this particular process then goes on to release charged electrons.
There is also Nuclear radiation, which is the type emitted by nuclear power plants. Neutrons are released through this type of nuclear reaction. Beta decay radiation is the type used in this experiment. Since the particles released through nuclear radiation are a size between Alpha and Beta radiation it was thought that materials that proved effective in blocking the Beta might also prove to do the same with the neutrons released from nuclear power use.
Common household substances that were tested included wood, a cotton-polyester blend, lead, cardboard, acrylic, and polyurethane. Of these substances, it was hypothesized that lead would be the most effective shield while; the cotton-polyester blend would be the least effective for use as shielding. The effectiveness of the shielding is defined as the amount of beta radiation absorbed by the shield.
Hazards:
Students worked with radioactive substances and were thus slightly exposed, however to prevent and negative effects, the radioactive substances were encased in a protective material and handled with tweezers. A very minute amount of the radioactive substance was used and, when not in use, it was stored in a lead tube. Because of these precautions only a dose of 1.57E-007 millirems per hour.
Methods:
The purpose of this experiment was to test household substances for the property of radiation shielding. For the purpose of this, a source of beta radiation, Strontium-90, was used. This radiation source was consistently placed ten centimeters away from the Geiger counter used to measure the number of radioactive particles that breached the shielding used. As a control, no shielding was used. After that, lead, wood, plastic, cardboard, acrylic, and a cotton-polyester blend were tested for their ability to block beta radiation by being placed approximately five centimeters between the source and the Geiger counter. Each then endured a fifty-second testing period.
Results and Discussion: Figure 1: Figure 2:
Figure 1 shows the same data as figure 2 albeit refined to the point where the data is consistent on a per millimeter basis. For the sake of accuracy, all of the conclusions drawn are based off of the per millimeter data.
To obtain this specific set of data the amount of background radiation was found. The the number of radioactive particles absorbed was subtracted from the background radiation to determine the amount of particles that were blocked.
Lead blocked the beta radiation well, but according to the results its effectiveness was greatly overshot by that of the cotton polyester fabric- which was the most effective at blocking beta particle radiation.
The hypothesis that the cotton polyester fabric would be the least efficient at blocking beta particle radiation, and lead would be the most efficient was disproved. This looks strange on paper but behaves exactly this way in practice, cotton polyester fabric blocks more beta radiation per millimeter than lead.
The quantitative disparities between materials in the actual test should be kept in mind. Research has suggested that after a particular width, any more material on top of what is necessary does nothing to reduce the amount of radiation being absorbed. Because all of our materials were of varying widths, this fact alone could render our experiment invalid. Because of this, the experiment would be improved by standardized width of radiation shielding materials. This change would validate the integrity of the experiment.
Project reflection
On the nature of science-
Science as it is traditionally presented seems to be nothing more than a strict set of guidelines. It is a complicated pattern of trick questions and strict commands fit for nothing but memorization. However once that is out of the way, what I would describe as "real" science, begins.
Through our own personalized experiments I learned that science as it is, often needs a strict set of guidelines. What may seem like a perfectly clear set of instructions often makes an experiment far more confusing. What is one to do then the perfectly rational hypothesis does not at mirrors the results? This explains to me why one can be payed to be a scientist. Nobody else wants to spend such time on minutiae, and what if questions. The nature of science is similar to that of the nature of architecture; Every detail is vital up until the final product.
My own project focused on beta particles emitted from radioactive substances prior to the experiment, and even as I was educated on the subject, I recoiled from radiation as one does with ones hand on a hot plate: quickly, violently, fearfully. I do not believe I gained any real, or valuable information on radioactive materials from the experiment, albeit perhaps a new found respect for the power of cotton-polyester for blocking radioactive beta particles. Instead, I feel I've gained a healthy respect, rather than reclusive fear, for radiation. Simply put, in my own mind radiation as it stands is nothing more than a series of high velocity atomized bullets. In most cases it is too minute, or mundane to be actively feared. I learned that sunlight, is solar radiation, which as it turns out isn't enormously different from the types we seem to be so afraid of.
My info-graphic as it is, is nothing more than a series of graphs regarding different ways to look at radioactive beta particle shielding. It exists to be a visualization of the somewhat haphazard data represented from my experiment. It is not shown but to create the info-graphic I first needed to learn about what differentiates beta radiation from the other two types of radioactive decay. I learned that during the process of radioactive decay, isotopes may commonly exhibit all three types of decay at once. Beta particles typically consist of negatively charged electrons shot off by elements undergoing transmutation. IN the grand scheme of things, one might generally regard beta particles as more harmful than alpha particles, but less harmful than gamma particles.
Each type of decay is harmful, but only in specific circumstances. These circumstances have a great deal to do with shielding. My knowledge of these attributes is displayed under the hazard index portion of my info-graphic. As far as energy and energy producing materials are concerned this info-graphic compounded the knowledge practiced in our experiment. Through its production I learned much more about radioactive fuels, their instability, and transmutation.
The purpose of the info-graphic, as with the experiment, was to inform people what common household material is the most effective at blocking radioactive particles. This was later focused to only be informative on beta particles due to the size the experiment and info-graphic would have to achieve to accomplish this enlarged set of goals. Thus, the focusing question is presented, simplified, as the title: Beta Shielding Statistics, witch is a shortened version of: Beta particle radiation shielding abilities of common household materials.
For the humanities portion of this project, please follow this link to the humanities section of my DP:
http://icdanimasdp.weebly.com/humanities1.html
Science as it is traditionally presented seems to be nothing more than a strict set of guidelines. It is a complicated pattern of trick questions and strict commands fit for nothing but memorization. However once that is out of the way, what I would describe as "real" science, begins.
Through our own personalized experiments I learned that science as it is, often needs a strict set of guidelines. What may seem like a perfectly clear set of instructions often makes an experiment far more confusing. What is one to do then the perfectly rational hypothesis does not at mirrors the results? This explains to me why one can be payed to be a scientist. Nobody else wants to spend such time on minutiae, and what if questions. The nature of science is similar to that of the nature of architecture; Every detail is vital up until the final product.
My own project focused on beta particles emitted from radioactive substances prior to the experiment, and even as I was educated on the subject, I recoiled from radiation as one does with ones hand on a hot plate: quickly, violently, fearfully. I do not believe I gained any real, or valuable information on radioactive materials from the experiment, albeit perhaps a new found respect for the power of cotton-polyester for blocking radioactive beta particles. Instead, I feel I've gained a healthy respect, rather than reclusive fear, for radiation. Simply put, in my own mind radiation as it stands is nothing more than a series of high velocity atomized bullets. In most cases it is too minute, or mundane to be actively feared. I learned that sunlight, is solar radiation, which as it turns out isn't enormously different from the types we seem to be so afraid of.
My info-graphic as it is, is nothing more than a series of graphs regarding different ways to look at radioactive beta particle shielding. It exists to be a visualization of the somewhat haphazard data represented from my experiment. It is not shown but to create the info-graphic I first needed to learn about what differentiates beta radiation from the other two types of radioactive decay. I learned that during the process of radioactive decay, isotopes may commonly exhibit all three types of decay at once. Beta particles typically consist of negatively charged electrons shot off by elements undergoing transmutation. IN the grand scheme of things, one might generally regard beta particles as more harmful than alpha particles, but less harmful than gamma particles.
Each type of decay is harmful, but only in specific circumstances. These circumstances have a great deal to do with shielding. My knowledge of these attributes is displayed under the hazard index portion of my info-graphic. As far as energy and energy producing materials are concerned this info-graphic compounded the knowledge practiced in our experiment. Through its production I learned much more about radioactive fuels, their instability, and transmutation.
The purpose of the info-graphic, as with the experiment, was to inform people what common household material is the most effective at blocking radioactive particles. This was later focused to only be informative on beta particles due to the size the experiment and info-graphic would have to achieve to accomplish this enlarged set of goals. Thus, the focusing question is presented, simplified, as the title: Beta Shielding Statistics, witch is a shortened version of: Beta particle radiation shielding abilities of common household materials.
For the humanities portion of this project, please follow this link to the humanities section of my DP:
http://icdanimasdp.weebly.com/humanities1.html