168,994 research outputs found
Self-association of the SET domains of human ALL-1 and of Drosophila TRITHORAX and ASH1 proteins
No full textThe human ALL-1 gene is involved in acute leukemia through gene fusions, partial tandem duplications or a specific deletion. Several sequence motifs within the ALL-1 protein, such as the SET domain, PHD fingers and the region with homology to DNA methyl transferase are shared with other proteins involved in transcription regulation through chromatin alterations. However, the function of these motifs is still not clear. Studying ALL-1 presents an additional challenge because the gene is the human homologue of Drosophila trithorax. The latter is a member of the trithorax-Polycornb gene family which acts to determine the body pattern of Drosophila by maintaining expression or repression of the Antennapedia-bithorax homeotic gene complex. Here we apply yeast two hybrid methodology, in vivo immunoprecipitation and in vitro 'pull down' techniques to show self association of the SET motifs of ALL-1, TRITHORAX and ASH1 proteins (Drosophila ASH1 is encoded by a trithorax-group gene). Point mutations in evolutionary conserved residues of TRITHORAX SET, abolish the interaction. SET-SET interactions might act in integrating the activity of ALL-1 (TRX and ASH1) protein molecules, simultaneously positioned at different maintenance elements and directing expression of the same or different target genes
rosen
No full textrise v. . . de ole bitch rosen up out o' de bobbin' hole an' ketched un by de pants, ab' tore 'em 'most off o' he. . .PRINTED ITEMW. J. KIRWIN NOV 1976JH NOV 1976Used INot usedWithdraw
Aristophanes' political comedies and (bad?) imitations
No full textNella parabasi delle Nuvole seconde Aristofane avoca implicitamente a sé il ruolo di πρῶτος εὑρετής della Demagogenkomödie: ruolo che si è tentati di attribuirgli a partire dal trattamento che il personaggio di Cleone riceve nei Cavalieri. Ma sappiamo bene che le cose non stanno esattamente così: almeno un illustre precedente è rappresentato dal Dionisalessandro di Cratino, commedia mitologica il cui protagonista era allegorica controfigura di Pericle. Né d’altra parte Aristofane è totalmente originale nella sua scelta di consacrare integralmente una propria commedia a un demagogo ancora in auge: pochi anni dopo la rappresentazione dei Cavalieri, e dunque ben prima della seconda redazione delle Nuvole, Eupoli aveva fatto di uno schiavo persiano, Maricante, l’alter ego di Iperbolo, che, morto Cleone, aveva assunto la leadership della democrazia radicale ateniese. Iperbolo è peraltro protagonista della omonima commedia di Platone, il commediografo che fu autore di altre due Demagogenkomödien: Pisandro e Cleofonte. Come giudicare, allora, la iperbolica rivendicazione aristofanea? Questa la domanda da cui muoverà il presente intervento, che intende indagare le origini e la limitata fortuna di questa specifica tipologia di commedia politica.In the parabasis of Clouds II, speaking about the treatment reserved to Cleon in the Knights, Aristophanes implicitly presents himself as πρῶτος εὑρετής of the ‘demagogue-comedy’. But we know that things are not properly so: at least one important exemplum is offered by Cratinus’ Dionysalexandros, mythological comedy whose protagonist had to be identified by innuendo with Pericles. Nor, on the other hand, Aristophanes is totally original in its choice of consecrating the whole play to a demagogue still on the top: some years after the representation of the Knights, and before the revision of Clouds’ parabasis, Eupolis had done of a Persian slave, Marikas, the alter ego of Hyperbolus who, after Cleon’s death, had taken the leadership of radical Athenian democracy. Furthermore, to Hyperbolus is entitled a comedy of Plato comicus, who is also author of two more ‘demagogue-comedies’: Peisandros and Cleophon. How to judge, then, the hyperbolic Aristophanes claim? That’s the question on which move this speech, which aims to investigate the origins and the limited luck of such peculiar subgenre of Athenian political comedy
Variations on the Author
No full text“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
O que é o paradoxo EPR? Uma reconstrução didática do artigo de Einstein, Podolsky e Rosen
No full textThe objective of this work is to provide a didactic reconstruction of the article by Einstein, Podolsky e Rosen, introducing the theoretical aspects necessary for the understanding of the work (which are usually presented in the initial phases of Quantum Mechanics courses), discussing the structure of the original argument and explaining the paradox from the very statements taken from the article. Based on the presentation we are proposing, the EPR paradox can be presented in introductory under-graduate courses in Quantum Mechanics (for bachelors and licentiate degrees) enabling the understanding of the discussion on the completeness of quantum theory proposed by Einstein, Podolsky and Rosen and by the genesis of the concept that would later become known as quantum entanglement.O objetivo deste trabalho é proporcionar uma reconstrução didática do artigo de Einstein, Podolsky e Rosen, introduzindo os aspectos teóricos necessários para a compreensão do trabalho (os quais usualmente são apresentados nas fases iniciais dos cursos de Mecânica Quântica), discutindo a estrutura do argumento original e explicando o paradoxo a partir das próprias colo-cações retiradas do artigo. A partir da apresentação que estamos propondo, o paradoxo EPR pode ser apresentado em disciplinas introdutórias de Mecânica Quântica da graduação (para bacharelado e licenciatura), viabilizando a compreensão da discussão sobre a completude da teoria quântica proposta por Einstein, Podolsky e Rosen e o entendimento da gênese do conceito que, posteriormente, ficaria conhecido como emaranhamento quântico.
 
Mill como filósofo moral (Algúns comentarios sobre o Mill de Fredrick Rosen)
No full textFirst, I want to thank Professor Rosen’s deep and illuminating study of the Philosophy of Stuart Mill. In my view, one of the most important contributions of the author is his claim that Mill was not only a social moralist but was primarily a philosopher and a logician. In many ways, Rosen is right. Mill was not a moral philosopher, or at least was not only a moral philosopher. However, he was concerned with the part of philosophy that deals with morality and enthusiastically defended both the welfare and the individual and social development. First, I want to thank Professor Rosen’s deep and illuminating study of the Philosophy of Stuart Mill. In my view, one of the most important contributions of the author is his claim that Mill was not only a social moralist but was primarily a philosopher and a logician. In many ways, Rosen is right. Mill was not a moral philosopher, or at least was not only a moral philosopher. However, he was concerned with the part of philosophy that deals with morality and enthusiastically defended both the welfare and the individual and social development. As we say, Mill was not only a moral philosopher, because in many cases he anticipated to contemporary metaphysics, showing that the principles of normative ethical could be defended so that the human intellect helps to understand them. Even so, it should be added that Mill was, however, a reformer and a defender of moral character education. I think no exaggeration to say that Mill used logic and reasoning as ways to promote intellectual and moral development of all human beings, which is necessary for the individual improvement of welfare and social harmony. Reading Mill carefully is discovered that all his reasoning and use of the senses is aimed at deepening the welfare of all members of humanity, recommending the highest pleasures (more developed). Being a moral philosopher is not so, and as Fred Rosen suggests in his brilliant work, an obstacle to Mill being a defender of ethical revolution of society, i.e., the transformation of human life. Thus, while I deeply admire the contribution of Professor Rosen to the study of Mill, I will show my disagreement with it at some length, and finally I will also summarize the main points of convergence between the study of Rosen and my own view of John Stuart Mill’s thought.DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.15304/t.20.1.2623En primer lugar, quiero agradecer al Profesor Rosen su profundo y esclarecedor estudio sobre la Filosofía de Stuart Mill. A mi modo de ver, una de las contribuciones más importantes del autor es su afirmación de que Mill no era solamente un moralista social sino que era ante todo un filósofo y un lógico. En muchos sentidos, Rosen esta en lo cierto. Mill no era un filósofo moral, o al menos no era sólo un filósofo moral. Sin embargo, le preocupaba la parte de la filosofía que se ocupa de la moralidad y defendía de forma entusiasta el bienestar tanto como el desarrollo individual y social. Como decimos, Mill no era únicamente un filósofo moral, porque en muchos casos se anticipó a la metafísica contemporánea, mostrando que los principios de ética normativa podían ser defendidos de manera que el intelecto humano ayudase a comprenderlos. Sin embargo, debería añadirse que Mill fue, no obstante, un moralista reformador y un defensor de la educación moral. Creo que no exagerado afirmar que Mill usó la lógica y el razonamiento como formas de promover el desarrollo intelectual y moral de todos los seres humanos, lo cual es necesario para el perfeccionamiento individual del bienestar y la armonía social. Leyendo a Mill cuidadosamente se descubre que todo su razonamiento y uso de los sentidos está dirigido a profundizar sobre el bienestar de todos los miembros de la humanidad, recomendando los placeres más altos (más desarrollados). Ser un filósofo moral no es, así, y como parece sugerir Fred Rosen en su brillante trabajo, un obstáculo para que Mill sea un defensor de la revolución moral de la sociedad, es decir, de la transformación de la vida humana. Así pues, aunque admiro profundamente la contribución del Profesor Rosen al estudio de Mill, mostraré mis desacuerdos con ella con una cierta extensión, y resumiré finalmente los principales puntos de convergencia entre el estudio de Rosen y mi propio punto de vista sobre el pensamiento de John Stuart Mill.DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.15304/t.20.1.2623En primeiro lugar, quero agradecer ao Profesor Rosen o seu profundo e esclarecedor estudo sobre a Filosofía de Stuart Mill. Ao meu modo de ver, unha das contribucións máis importantes do autor é a súa afirmación de que Mill non era soamente un moralista social senón que era ante todo un filósofo e un lóxico. En moitos sentidos, Rosen esta en o certo. Mill non era un filósofo moral, ou polo menos non era só un filósofo moral. Con todo, preocupáballe a parte da filosofía que se ocupa da moralidade e defendía de forma entusiasta o benestar tanto como o desenvolvemento individual e social.Como dicimos, Mill non era unicamente un filósofo moral, porque en moitos casos anticipouse á metafísica contemporánea, mostrando que os principios de ética normativa podían ser defendidos de maneira que o intelecto humano axudase a comprendelos. Con todo, debería engadirse que Mill foi, no entanto, un moralista reformador e un defensor da educación moral. Creo que non esaxerado afirmar que Mill usou a lóxica e o razoamento como formas de promover o desenvolvemento intelectual e moral de todos os seres humanos, o cal é necesario para o perfeccionamento individual do benestar e a harmonía social. Lendo a Mill coidadosamente descóbrese que todo o seu razoamento e uso dos sentidos está dirixido a profundar sobre o benestar de todos os membros da humanidade, recomendando os praceres máis altos (máis desenvolvidos). Ser un filósofo moral non é, así, e como parece suxerir Fred Rosen no seu brillante traballo, un obstáculo para que Mill sexa un defensor da revolución moral da sociedade, é dicir, da transformación da vida humana.Así pois, aínda que admiro profundamente a contribución do Profesor Rosen ao estudo de Mill, mostrarei os meus desacordos con ela cunha certa extensión, e resumirei finalmente os principais puntos de converxencia entre o estudo de Rosen e o meu propio punto de vista sobre o pensamento de John Stuart Mill.DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.15304/t.20.1.262
- …
