A structure A = (A; E₀, E₁ , . . . , ${E_{n - 2}}$) is an n-grid if each E i is an equivalence relation on A and whenver X and Y are equivalence classes of, repectively, distinct E i and E j , then X ∩ Y is finite. A coloring χ : A → n is acceptable if whenver X is an equivalence class of E i , then {ϰ Є X: χ(ϰ) = i} is finite. If (...) B is any set, then the n-cube B n = (B n ; E₀ E₁ , . . . , ${E_{n - 2}}$) is considinate axis. Kuratowski [9], generalizing the n = 3 case proved by Sierpiński [17], proved that ℝ n has an acceptable coloring iff ${2^{{N_0}}}$ ≤ ${N_{n - 2}}$. The main result is: of A is a semialgebraic (i.e., first-order definable in the field of reals) n-grid, then the following are equivalent: (1) if A embeds all finite n-cubes, then ${2^{{N_0}}}$ ≤ ${N_{n - 2}}$; if A embeds ℝ n , then ${2^{{N_0}}}$ ≤ ${N_{n - 2}}$; (3) A has an acceptable coloring. (shrink)

Orestes has returned to Argos, . For him to brandish at his father's murderers is natural there, where he is delivering a sort of general manifesto as to his aims, and where the strong word is justified and alleviated by the jingle with juxtaposed . But there is no reason for Orestes to go on insisting on the bloodthirstiness of these aims, and reads oddly in 100, where he is explaining soberly his plan of campaign.

All commentators on these lines make two assumptions about the first clause, that means ‘sitting in judgement’, ‘punishing’, or the like, that the which is its subject as well as that of is the second in a series of two: the subsequent slaying punishes or sits in judgement on the previous; thus the slaying of Cly taemnestra herself will sit in judgement upon that of Agamemnon, just as that had sat in judgement upon the of Iphigenia. Then opinions differ as (...) to whether is to be taken as the object of both verbs, or of one but not the other. (shrink)

The locomotor pattern of a goldfish may be described by 17 locomotor variables whose time series are known to exhibit distinct patterns of autocorrelation. The present model reduces the set of 17 variables to a set of seven predictor variables which optimize the prediction of future locomotor behavior. These seven variables are then grouped into two clusters by a dendogram analysis, and it is shown that the clusters are also characterized by their strength of prediction. A locomotor control model is (...) then formulated where one cluster is interpreted to be a level of activity factor and the other is hypothesized to be a turning behavior factor. (shrink)