Abstract and document reproduction Final report, 1 Oct. 1969 - 30 Sep. 1970

Document and abstract reproduction and dissemination facility operations revie

Experiment to transfer technology from a university-based center Final report

NASA program on transferring technology from university information cente

Searching for New Physics by means of Relative Phases and Moduli of Decay Amplitudes

We illustrate some tests which may shed light on physics beyond the Standard Model. Some of them are especially sensitive to possible signals of new physics.Comment: 16 page

Standard interest profiles - Development of technical subjects Final report

NASA university program for technology transfer, and development of Standard Interest Profiles /SIP

Topics on urban planning annotated bibliography

Urban planning and development - bibliography and abstract

Naked Came I: Jurisdiction-Stripping and the Constitutionality of House Bill 3313

In his law review article, Professor Henry Hart responded to the questions of whether Congress had unlimited control of federal jurisdiction and whether this control was consistent with other provisions in the Constitution. Though Professor Hart\u27s article has been widely debated, his overarching thesis is generally accepted: Congress\u27 power to restrict Supreme Court jurisdiction is bound by the requirement that the Court\u27s “essential functions” may not be trammeled, but Congress\u27 power to restrict lower federal court jurisdiction is broad. This Comment will build on Professor Hart\u27s thesis, arguing that the essential functions of the federal judiciary are broader than what he and later commentators have purported. The federal judiciary\u27s jurisdiction is protected by a three-tiered “essential functions” restriction. First, Congress may not abridge federal courts\u27 essential functions within the tripartite system. Secondly, Congress may not abridge federal courts\u27 essential functions as the “judicial power of the United States.” Finally, Congress may not violate any individual constitutional liberty in exercising its jurisdictional powers. Ultimately, by expanding Professor Hart\u27s essential functions thesis, this Comment will demonstrate that this three-step test is necessary to analyze the constitutionality of any jurisdiction-stripping act within our tripartite system of government.Part II of this Comment will summarize the various theories of Congress\u27 jurisdictional powers. Part III will examine the historical and philosophical roots of the Constitution and Congressional power. This section will illustrate that the framers\u27 intent and the wording of the Constitution prevent Congress from altering the constitutional plan or preventing federal courts from performing its essential functions. Part IV will apply the preceding analysis to House Bill 3313 and ultimately conclude that Congress does not have the power to strip any federal court of the jurisdiction to hear same-sex marriage cases

Naked Came I: Jurisdiction-Stripping and the Constitutionality of House Bill 3313

In his law review article, Professor Henry Hart responded to the questions of whether Congress had unlimited control of federal jurisdiction and whether this control was consistent with other provisions in the Constitution. Though Professor Hart\u27s article has been widely debated, his overarching thesis is generally accepted: Congress\u27 power to restrict Supreme Court jurisdiction is bound by the requirement that the Court\u27s “essential functions” may not be trammeled, but Congress\u27 power to restrict lower federal court jurisdiction is broad. This Comment will build on Professor Hart\u27s thesis, arguing that the essential functions of the federal judiciary are broader than what he and later commentators have purported. The federal judiciary\u27s jurisdiction is protected by a three-tiered “essential functions” restriction. First, Congress may not abridge federal courts\u27 essential functions within the tripartite system. Secondly, Congress may not abridge federal courts\u27 essential functions as the “judicial power of the United States.” Finally, Congress may not violate any individual constitutional liberty in exercising its jurisdictional powers. Ultimately, by expanding Professor Hart\u27s essential functions thesis, this Comment will demonstrate that this three-step test is necessary to analyze the constitutionality of any jurisdiction-stripping act within our tripartite system of government.Part II of this Comment will summarize the various theories of Congress\u27 jurisdictional powers. Part III will examine the historical and philosophical roots of the Constitution and Congressional power. This section will illustrate that the framers\u27 intent and the wording of the Constitution prevent Congress from altering the constitutional plan or preventing federal courts from performing its essential functions. Part IV will apply the preceding analysis to House Bill 3313 and ultimately conclude that Congress does not have the power to strip any federal court of the jurisdiction to hear same-sex marriage cases

Computer simulation of the microstructure and rheology of semi-solid alloys under shear

The rheological behavior of metallic alloys containing both solid and liquid phases is investigated in the low solid fraction range (<50%). This behavior depends on both the solid fraction and the shear rate. The concept of Effective Volume Fraction (EVF) is used to decorrelate the influence of these two parameters. At high shear rate the slurry behaves like a suspension of hard spheres, whereas at lower shear rate, particles tend to aggregate in clusters, entrapping liquid and thus, increasing the EVF and the viscosity. A lattice model is introduced to simulate the aggregation / break-up processes within a slurry under shear. When the steady state is reached, the entrapped liquid fraction is calculated, leading to a viscosity estimation. Simulation results for the viscosity and 3D cluster structure are in good agreement with experimental results.Comment: 30 pages, 17 figures, to be published in Acta Mate

A convenient and safe method to generate a large quantity of Aspergillus parasiticus spores

In order to examine the spore pigments in strains of Aspergillus parasiticus, we developed a method to safely generate a large quantity of spores while conserving laboratory space, resources, and time