U.S. Passport Primer: A Guide to the New Passport Regulations

Written by Larry Denton

Continued from page 1

You need to bring two identical 2-by-2 inch, full-face, front-view photographs, and a completed DS-11 application form (available from one ofrepparttar 6,000 facilities or at http://www.travel.state.gov/passport/passport_1738.html)

In addition, you will need a driver's license or government-issued ID card and proof of citizenship, which in most cases, is an original or certified birth certificate.

All children under age 14 must also apply for a passport in person, and both parents or legal guardians must appear together and signrepparttar 136265 child's form (ifrepparttar 136266 second parent submits a notarized letter of intent, one parent signature is adequate). Minors age 14 to 17 must also appear in person and for security reasons, parental consent may be required. And, unlike adults, children under 14 must apply for renewals in person.

For Americans 16 and older, a first passport costs $97 and is good for 10 years. Children underrepparttar 136267 age of 16 require their own passport which cost $82 and are valid for five years. Renewals, which can be done by mail, are $67 for both adults and children.

One ofrepparttar 136268 most often asked questions, "When should I apply for a passport?" has a simple answer--several months before your planned trip. If you will need visas from foreign embassies to enter those countries, allow even more time. Don't wait to get a passport! Get it now, so you will be ready in case you may need or want to travel on short notice. The average time from application to passport arrival is six to eight weeks, and passport demand goes up duringrepparttar 136269 summer months, so plan accordingly.

When you receive your passport, remember to sign it in ink and print your name and address so it may be returned to you if it is ever lost.

Larry Denton is a retired history teacher having taught 33 years at Hobson High in Hobson, Montana. He is currently V.P. of Elfin Enterprises, Inc., an Internet business providing valuable information on a variety of timely topics. For an embassy full of advice, resources and suggestions about passports, visit http://www.PassportPlace.com

The Possibilities for Anarchy (II)

Written by Angelique van Engelen

Continued from page 1
The philosophic sciences bring outrepparttar issues thatrepparttar 136200 wider society has been dealing with intensely sincerepparttar 136201 1970s in many ways. Both proponents of determinism and their opponents,repparttar 136202 'pluralists', boast incessant streams of prominent examples. "One would think that it should be at least a clearly decidable question", according to Carl Hoefer in an article "Causal Determinism", which is due for publication in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy inrepparttar 136203 Summer of 2005. But further reading teaches you soon that to expect any outcome inrepparttar 136204 battle between determinists and pluralists is not realistic. The debate, which to some extent has been ongoing for almost as long as humans have been around, was first highly topical for a brief moment atrepparttar 136205 turn ofrepparttar 136206 previous century inrepparttar 136207 more restricted area of mathematics. What's become known asrepparttar 136208 'Russell Paradox' knockedrepparttar 136209 mathematical community off its feet. It gave rise to more experimental mathematics than any ofrepparttar 136210 generally lazy formula makers had expected, who thought they were making progress in denoting reality this way, had been reckoning with. The Russel paradox points out that until then,repparttar 136211 mathematicians had held false pretenses as torepparttar 136212 ramifications of their field. The paradox in simple terms amounts torepparttar 136213 following question about sets (a collection of objects that can be defined as a rule). He wondered whether it was possible to create a set out of sets defined as ‘not members’. Russell wondered if that particular set contains itself and this way formulatedrepparttar 136214 first paradox in mathematics. He argued that there are only two possible answers torepparttar 136215 question of whether a set made up of sets not part of themselves can actually be part of itself. Ifrepparttar 136216 answer is yes, then set A does contain itself. But if set A contains itself, then, according to its definition, set A would not belong to set A, and thus it does not belong to itself. Sincerepparttar 136217 assumption that A contains itself leads to a contradiction, it must be wrong. Ifrepparttar 136218 answer is no, then set A does not contain itself. But again, according torepparttar 136219 defining condition, if A does not belong to itself, then it would belong to set A. We have contradictory propositions that imply one another. The assumption of no yields yes, which yields no, and so on apparently. To still see this as a threat torepparttar 136220 foundation of mathematics would be a somewhat out of date response, becauserepparttar 136221 dilemma apparently has been fixed since. Ed Pegg at Math.com saysrepparttar 136222 Russell paradox was later fixed, viarepparttar 136223 so called ‘Zermelo-Fraenkel axioms’. “So far, no errors have been found”, Pegg says.

It’s a cliche but this is probably one ofrepparttar 136224 first examples to show us that reality is not black and white. And rather than grey, it’s just bigger allrepparttar 136225 time. That is one thing every scientist agrees on. Perhapsrepparttar 136226 Russell Paradox only indicated an end torepparttar 136227 era ofrepparttar 136228 hunter gatherers inrepparttar 136229 mathematic sciences, but it is interesting to see that Russell went on to deal with this issue by basically working on a new domain inrepparttar 136230 sciences.

Rather than solvingrepparttar 136231 problem in maths, his resultant thoughts were better applied in another field of science andrepparttar 136232 man is still credited in part forrepparttar 136233 rise of computer science. In attempts to argue his way out ofrepparttar 136234 paradox, Russell invented a concept of a logical transformation as an operation that requiresrepparttar 136235 equivalent of a quantum of time. He designed a set of logical operations in which a particular problem would be expressed as a program of operations to follow. 'We then turnrepparttar 136236 program on and let it run. Each logical inference is implemented in turn, and whenrepparttar 136237 process is completed, we get our answer', Hoefer describesrepparttar 136238 essence ofrepparttar 136239 work as. A search for an ‘end theory’, some explanation for everything which incidentally will also deciderepparttar 136240 determinist – pluralist issue is in some waysrepparttar 136241 goal of everybody’s scientific work, butrepparttar 136242 argument these days is more or less centered around alternative ways of discovering possibilities to obtain knowledge on this issue. Work onrepparttar 136243 ‘earth’s genomics’ has hardly been anything more than making silly presuppositions, efforts to piece together a puzzle which ultimately might just appear to be an exercise trying to stack boxes on top of each other in an atmosphere which doesn’t allow for gravity. To say that only a sound system for anarchy could be found after we’ve actually figured out how nature really works would be defeatist. All good systems are in need of some real protestant work ethic, rather than dreams of utopic proportion that simply prove false. The vastness ofrepparttar 136244 universe is at once dizzying, awe inspiring and also offers a bounty of opportunities.

Angelique van Engelen is a freelance writer/researcher living in Amsterdam the Netherlands. She writes for www.contentclix.com and contributes to a writing ring http://clixyPlays.blogspot.com

    <Back to Page 1
ImproveHomeLife.com © 2005
Terms of Use