1)Яку трагедію довелося пережити Лонгрену й маленькій Ассоль.2) Хто винен у смерті Мері.3)Як Лонгрен помстився Меннерсу?Як сам Лонгрен оцінив вчинок? Як ви ставитися до нього? 4) Які відносини склалися між Лонгреном і мешканцями Камерни?
Ч. Дарвин полагал естественный отбор основополагающим фактором эволюции живого (селекционизм в биологии) . Накопление в конце XIX - начале XX века сведений по генетике, в частности обнаружение дискретного характера наследования фенотипических признаков, подтолкнуло многих исследователей к пересмотру указанного тезиса Дарвина: в качестве чрезвычайно важных факторов эволюции стали рассматриваться мутации генотипа (мутационизм Г. де Фриза, сальтационизм Р. Гольдшмитда и др.) . С другой стороны, открытие известных корреляций среди признаков родственных видов (закон гомологических рядов) Н. И. Вавилова привело к формулировке гипотез об эволюции на основе закономерностей, а не случайной изменчивости (номогенез Л. С. Берга, батмогенез Э. Д. Копа и др.) . В 1920-1940-е г. г. в эволюционной биологии интерес к селекционистским теориям возродился благодаря синтезу классической генетики и теории естественного отбора. Разработанная в результате этого синтетическая теория эволюции (СТЭ) , часто называемая неодарвинизмом, опирается на количественный анализ частоты аллелей в популяциях, изменяющейся под влиянием естественного отбора. Тем не менее, открытия последних десятилетий в различных областях научного знания — от молекулярной биологии с её теорией нейтральных мутаций М. Кимуры и палеонтологии с её теорией прерывистого равновесия С. Дж. Гоулда и Н. Элдриджа (в которой вид понимается как относительно статическая фаза эволюционного процесса) до математики с её теорией бифуркаций и фазовых переходов — свидетельствуют о недостаточности классической СТЭ для адекватного описания всех аспектов биологической эволюции. Дискуссия о роли различных факторов в эволюции продолжается и сегодня, и эволюционная биология подошла к необходимости своего очередного, третьего синтеза.
Сommunication tools, which are almost always available and relatively easy to use, greatly facilitate our communication.The exchange of information can take place in just a few seconds, which is extremely convenient and economical both in terms of time and money. Previously, in order to, for example, contact a person with whom you can not meet in reality, you had to use traditional mail, which is sometimes just inconvenient, and, moreover, slow and expensive (compared to free mail services on the network). In addition, the parcel could get lost, get damaged on the way - the human factor could also play a cruel joke with the recipient and sender - so such a dialogue at a distance could last for many years, but, at the same time, contain no more than a dozen replicas. There is almost no hope that the email you sent will get lost or get damaged "on the road", so if your message remains unanswered, it is much more likely that the recipient simply ignored it, rather than "loss in the Network" or any other problems.
One of the disadvantages of "fast communication" is the devaluation of the language, which has already become widespread illiteracy of Internet users, often developing into a disaster of catastrophic proportions. And yet, if the designated user did not have the opportunity to show the world their knowledge of the language, no one would have known about his success - apparently, and his school teacher - which suggests that it is not necessarily the speech "became poor" with the advent of communication tools: just the means of communication gave us the opportunity to contact someone, Yes, creating a similar problem.
What are the advantages?
Сommunication tools, which are almost always available and relatively easy to use, greatly facilitate our communication.The exchange of information can take place in just a few seconds, which is extremely convenient and economical both in terms of time and money. Previously, in order to, for example, contact a person with whom you can not meet in reality, you had to use traditional mail, which is sometimes just inconvenient, and, moreover, slow and expensive (compared to free mail services on the network). In addition, the parcel could get lost, get damaged on the way - the human factor could also play a cruel joke with the recipient and sender - so such a dialogue at a distance could last for many years, but, at the same time, contain no more than a dozen replicas. There is almost no hope that the email you sent will get lost or get damaged "on the road", so if your message remains unanswered, it is much more likely that the recipient simply ignored it, rather than "loss in the Network" or any other problems.
One of the disadvantages of "fast communication" is the devaluation of the language, which has already become widespread illiteracy of Internet users, often developing into a disaster of catastrophic proportions. And yet, if the designated user did not have the opportunity to show the world their knowledge of the language, no one would have known about his success - apparently, and his school teacher - which suggests that it is not necessarily the speech "became poor" with the advent of communication tools: just the means of communication gave us the opportunity to contact someone, Yes, creating a similar problem.