Authors’ Response: An Enquiry Concerning Constitutional Understanding

One of Professor Lawson’s first students, alluding to a 1985 article with the provocative title “Why Professor [Marty] Redish Is Wrong about Abstention,” declared that his ambition was to inspire someone to write an article entitled “Why [the student] Is Wrong about XXX.” The student claimed that, regardless of what filled in the “XXX,” this event would be the pinnacle of academic accomplishment. If that view is even close to the mark, then having an entire conference devoted to explaining why Professors Lawson and Seidman are wrong about the Constitution is an extraordinary honor. In all seriousness, we are genuinely flattered by the remarkable gathering convened at Georgetown University Law Center on April 20, 2018 to discuss our book, “A Great Power of Attorney”: Understanding the Fiduciary Constitution. We are profoundly grateful to the many participants at the conference, to the editors at the Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy, to Randy Barnett and the staff at the Georgetown Center for the Constitution, and, most of all, to Suzanna Sherry, Richard Primus, Ethan Leib, Jed Shugerman, and John Mikhail for taking the time and energy to engage with our work. We truly wish we could have accessed their comments before sending our book to print, and we are delighted and honored to respond in this forum to their comments and to those of some of the other conference discussants

Periodic solutions of isotone hybrid systems

Suggested by conversations in 1991 (Mark~Krasnosel'ski\u{\i} and Aleksei~Pokrovski\u{\i} with TIS), this paper generalizes earlier work (Krasnosel'ski\u{\i}-Pokrovski\u{\i} 1974) of theirs by defining a setting of hybrid systems with isotone switching rules for a partially ordered set of modes and then obtaining a periodicity result in that context. An application is given to a partial differential equation modeling calcium release and diffusion in cardiac cells

Free-Spinning Wind-Tunnel Tests of a Low-Wing Monoplane with Systematic Changes in Wings and Tails IV : Effect of Center-of-Gravity Location

Eight wings and three tails, covering a wide range of aerodynamic characteristics, were independently ballasted so as to be interchangeable with no change in mass distribution. For each of the 24 resulting wing-tail combinations, observations were made of the steady spin for four control settings and of recoveries for five control manipulations. The results are presented in the form of charts comparing the spin characteristics. The tests are part of a general investigation being made in the NACA free-spinning tunnel to determine the effects of systematic changes in wing and tail arrangement upon the steady-spin and the recovery characteristics of a conventional low-wing monoplane for various load distributions

Free-spinning Wind-tunnel Tests of a Low-wing Monoplane with Systemic Changes in Wings and Tails

A series of tests was made at the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) free-spinning tunnel to determine the effect of systematic changes in wing and tail arrangement upon steady-spinning and recovery characteristics of a conventional low-wing monoplane model for a basic loading condition. Eight wings and three tails, covering a wide range of aerodynamic characteristics, were independently ballasted so as to be interchangeable with no change in mass distribution. For each of the 24 wing-tail combinations, observations were made of steady spins for four control settings and of recoveries for five control manipulators. The results are presented in the form of charts comparing the spin characteristics. The results showed that, with a poor tail arrangement, wing plan form and tip shape had a considerable effect on the spinning characteristics

Free-Spinning Wind-Tunnel Tests of a Low-Wing Monoplane with Systematic Changes in Wings and Tails V : Effect of Airplane Relative Density

The reported tests are a continuation of an NACA investigation being made in the free-spinning wind tunnel to determine the effects of independent variations in load distribution, wing and tail arrangement, and control disposition on the spin characteristics of airplanes. The standard series of tests was repeated to determine the effect of airplane relative density. Tests were made at values of the relative-density parameter of 6.8, 8.4 (basic), and 12.0; and the results were analyzed. The tested variations in the relative-density parameter may be considered either as variations in the wing loading of an airplane spun at a given altitude, with the radii of gyration kept constant, or as a variation of the altitude at which the spin takes place for a given airplane. The lower values of the relative-density parameter correspond to the lower wing loadings or to the lower altitudes of the spin