This solutions manual has one redeeming factor - for the most part, the solutions are accurate.

However, this is where the benefit ends. The methods for solving the problems are severely abbreviated. Problems that may take 8-10 steps to solve are presented in 3-4 steps, with little reason presented. Often, the answers to the odd exercises in the textbook provide equal guidance. Save your money and get another reference (and a different textbook, if at all possible).

Professors and others who have already studied calculus may find the solutions manual to be adequate - of course, they have already been exposed to the material. So a subset of these folks may say such things as "if you cannot understand this, you are too dumb to do calculus". Thus, though they may be able to solve a calculus exercise, these arrogant ignoramuses are blind with respect to the beginning students needs, so their opinions are irrelevant to the situation. If one is trying to learn calculus, the last thing one requires is the triviality of arrogance. Since introductory textbooks and their associated solutions manuals should suit the ultimate purpose of promoting understanding, this manual fails.

The solutions manual, much like the inferior Stewart textbook (see my review of the text), often reads like a professor's "notes to myself" manual. Some "solutions" read thusly: 1. Restatement of problem 2. Statement of one or two intermediate steps 3. Solution. This book contains many such solutions, thereby providing breadth at the expense of depth.

Though it can be done, a beginning calculus student should not spend much time trying to fill in the blanks in the author's reasoning - he or she should be learning the subject of calculus. I recommend the George F. Simmons Calculus and Analytic Geometry text, or the Anton Calculus: A New Horizon text and its associated solutions manual. ...

I have noticed that most people are NOT happy with the solutions presented in this manual, I agree that some of the solutions may be rather short, but it is 10 times better than being left to the solutions in the back of the text. Bottom Line = It's better than nothing.

Stewart is a rich man from his Calculus texts! He highly esteemed by many academic professionals who often brag about talking to him.
He is certainly not in touch with a student's mind and how it learns; his text is a real turn-off and depletes enjoyment of the subject. I agree with another reviewer, Larson's text is far superior. Thank goodness a friend loaned it to me for the semester. I receive more insight into my homework from that text book than from this solution manual. As if the HARDCOVER text was so inexpensive.

I was excited to get this book and hoped that I would lear more about the components in a tube amp and what they do. The book talks about the high level functions and then jumps right into diagrams of specific amps. That jump left was to big for me. I got lost and although the schematic diagrams were somewhat facinating, there are many web sites that have those diagrams in more detail for many more amplifiers. I get the feeling that this book is really an attempt by the author to give you enough information to want to buy his amp kits. Further, when I went to the User Review Section of Harmony Central (A Musician Web Site with extensive information about musical products), and looked up Torres Engineering I found reviews by customers that were not happy. They had not been treated well on the phone and the products or services they purchased had problems and the company was unwilling to solve the problems. Before you buy any of the kits or amp modifications do yourself a favor and read the reviews.

I agree with many of the reviews below. This book is poorly written in a style which, while not exactly condescending, can be considered needlessly flippant. There is no real progression toward building a real tube amplifier, though there appears to be an attempt at one. You'll be confused by a series of somewhat disjoint chapters discussing various components of a tube amp and unfortunately interspersed with tube amp modifications that should have been placed later in the book. Finally, in the chapter(s) dealing building one, you realize that (a) you contantly have to look for more information in earlier chapters and (b) you do not really have a complete list of what you'll need (nor do you have a set of concrete how-to, step-by-step instructions).

If not for the fact that there's some valuable information tucked away on some of the book's pages, this would be a total bust.

This book contained lots of information, but the way it was presented made it extremely difficult to accomplish my final goal -- to build a class A amplifier. The book is not a tutorial on so much the construction of tube amps, but rather a long list of modifications. Perhaps the biggest problem that plagues this entire book is that the author repeatedly tells you to open up your '60s Marshall or Fender or Traynor amp, all of which are extremely expensive and not exactly readily available. Because I don't own any of those amps, I was stuck to just read about adding more midrange to a '66 Marshall JTM, rather than learning how midrange actually works. Also, the author spends too little time on important subjects (tubes in general were basically covered in 3 or 4 confusing sentences...).

I purchased Kitchen Witchery from a local bookstore and returned it the next day. Normally a fan of Weiser books, I was shocked to find blatant plagiarism of so many other (mostly Llewellyn) books. This book is a mixture of the entire Complete Book of Incense, Oils & Brews by Scott Cunningham with a few other sources from authors Laurie Cabot and the Farrars. Daniel has so very thinly paraphrased Cunningham's own words (example: "always stir clockwise" becomes rewritten as "stir clockwise always") that I am amazed this was published by such a reputable firm as Weiser. The worst part of this collection of "secrets" is that Daniel has listed identitcal recipes from other authors but CHANGED THE INGREDIENT AMOUNTS as well as left out important information about safe handling of the ingredients. This book reads like a garbled online Book of Shadows and is an insult to the hard work done by the authors listed in Daniel's bibliography.

Many times I have picked up this book to purchase it and then put it down again. The recipes are tempting and many, but I have a few problems with the author. I have borrowed this book from friends, but when it comes to endorsing it with my purchase, a little red flag goes up.

I am not new to witchcraft, and a lot of the instructions seem overly ritualistic to me. "Always stir in a clockwise direction" comes to mind. Daniel makes it sound as if the form and technique are more important than the function, and rarely if ever describes magical intent and the true purpose behind one's ritualistic endeavors (that is, self-programming to bring about change).

Daniel tends to lead a reader to think that if her precise instructions are not followed, the "spell" will not work. This is not a commonly held belief in the pagan traditions -- it is widely acknowledged that "magic" things happen because you have brought the change from within. In this regard, she can greatly confuse a person who is trying to find out more about the practical practise of Wicca or witchcraft. Perhaps Daniel is a highly ritualistic person herself, but she should at least mention that she is not following the mainstream traditions. Yes, many do think you can add power by stirring a certain way, but if you happen to act otherwise, it's not the end of the world because what really matters is one's focus and determination to bring about the change.

There are many fragrant and useful recipes compiled within. However, I believe I have seen most of them published in other people's works (Scott Cunningham and Laurie Cabot, for starters, and there are many more). I do not know if she gained clearance before publishing them in "her" book, but none of the seemingly plagiarized tables and recipes are credited to the other authors.

I keep considering this book for purchase because all of these nifty recipes are conveniently contained within one volume. I keep putting it down because I disagree with Daniel's tone and narrow-minded instructions. I do not like that the other authors are not credited with their works, but I do not know what went on behind the scenes with the publishers.

My hope for anyone considering this book is that if they do purchase it, they do so with open eyes about the content and the tone. If you can do it with a clear conscience, go ahead and get it; if not, best to choose a different book.

I'm new to the Craft, so I don't have the familiarity with other writers in this vien that other reviewers have, but I found the collection to be a great resource for someone who's still in the early stages of learning. The lists are exhaustive, and even though I haven't made my way through more than a few recipes, they've turned out wonderfully.

Recipes have a way of being very, very similar. I know my collection is full of ones that seem verbatum to those of friends, family, and most importantly, strangers. It's just the nature of such things.

I am very well-versed in Children's Literature and find this book a huge disappointment. While the art work is lovely, the story line is so vague and abstract, an adult can barely follow what the meaning of it is, let alone children. There is really no understanding of what takes place, the purpose of the crocodile, or the pond for that matter, or what the whole point of the story is. The meaning of all the implications in the story never come through. Cornwell is outstanding with her Scarpetta stories and I can't get enough of them! But to be so unclear in a children's book means that children don't get anything from the story, and that's a shame.

In reading the book, I found it laborious. Cornwell uses figurative language and metaphorical elements in her telling of the story. It also seems choppy and disjointed throughout. As an adult, I found myself rereading several pages to clarify what exactly the meaning was. I also lost interest in the book. I think that the elements of children flying and being unbound by gravity will be appealing to children, but I think the way that she delivers the story would confuse most elementary age children. The illustrations are beautiful, but I don't really see them portraying this magical world that Cornwell created. To me it looks as though the "land of the pond" is exactly like our world. Over all I would have to say, that the book was very disappointing.

I bought this book quite a while back for my little boys, purely because I am such a huge fan of Patricia Cornwell's books and I wanted him to read and enjoy her books aswell. When I found out that she had wrote a childrens book I ordered it straight away and it was one of the best things I did. Rhys loves it, has included it in his top ten all time favourite books, and reads it all the time. We both love the story, the fact that it is actually a poem, the way it almost sings to you and that Jarrord realises that things are OK where he is and doesn't need to know what is on the other side or anything else. Truly a wonderful, delightful and enchanting sotry. By the way my little boy is now eight years old and as I said, still loves the book. So come on Patricia write some more - Please.

The "holdings" and facts in this hornbook are wrong. Cases such as Harris and Clark contain horrible inaccuracies. Hope this helps.

Apparently the editor of this masterpiece is blind as a pig. My professor (LLM N.Y.U) suggested nutshells, etc., but, as her eyes narrowed, clearly stated, "Do not use the hornbook. It is wrong." She then stated, "It is just wrong." Always skeptical, I decided to check for myself. I reached the same conclusion after twenty minutes of reading. The facts (monetary amounts) in Clark are wrong. The "holding" in Harris is totally irrelevant, and the "holding" in Glenshaw Glass is downright laughable ... and wrong. Hope this helps.

My students have generally found this book helpful. The diagrams are wonderful and often help people visualize very complex tax transactions. I also think the book does an excellent job of explaining very difficult material. Other reveiws have indicated that there are erros in this book. It does appear that there is a typo in the Clark case, but I have not noticed more than the usual number of typos in this book. In addition, contrary to the statements of other reviewers, I think the discussion of both Glenshaw Glass (I am not sure what is laughable about the book's presentation of the holding in the case) and Harris are on target.

My advice is buy the book if you want some added help with Federal Income Tax, but use it as a reference, not as a bible. Also realize that Tax Professors often disagree about tax law, and about the merits of various cases, that is what makes law fun.

This book was clearly written to advance a Marxist/Liberal agenda, while being disguised as a scholarly work.
The conclusions in my opinion are contrary to common sense and observable fact. Those with some experience under their belts will recognize that fact.
The authors dispense with any notions of scientific inquiry and simply custom tailor their research to their own needs/agendas. So, in their twisted logic, someone with strong family ties, strong religious affiliations and a great career is "aggresive", "with unconscious layers of psychopathology" and of course "racist".
While folks from broken homes lacking in parental affection are "independent", "responsible" and "open minded"
If you believe that, run and buy this book

Adorno wanted to explain the catastrophe that was the Nazi regime and WW II. How could this happen in the midst of Western civilization? What of Western education, morality, and cultural achievements? Why did they fail to prevent this disaster?

Adorno, while a Marxist, was heavily influenced by Nietzsche. He belonged to the so-called Frankfurt school, a group of German intellectuals, the center of whose activities was Frankfurt, before Hitler came to power, and they had no practical choice but to flee. Adorno was the most psychologizing of the Frankfurt school. He believed that many answers to social and political problems are found in the psyche of the individual.

The political debacle that was the Nazi Germany led him to believe that his native country's case was not unique, that all Western societies, the U.S. included, are full of authoritarian personalities ready to follow tyrants at any moment. In fact, Adorno claimed that this is already happening everywhere, but in ways less subtle than in the Nazi Germany. The crisis in not merely German, or European, it is the crisis of Western civilization. The conditions of what he called "late capitalism" produce abundance of authoritarian personalities. There is not much direct coercion in America a la Nazi-ism, because we coerce ourselves internally, we are not really free spiritually and emotionally, so no concentration camps are needed for us--we are enslaved already. I have no response to this, as Adorno's extrapolation from the Nazi Germany to the U.S. of the second half of the twentieth century is absurd. What else can one say about it? He also belonged to a holistic tradition that tied together culture with social and political phenomena. So he argues that our music and our popular culture indicate that we are far on the road to enslavement. Adorno considered jazz as an artistic equivalent of castration, and the fondness for jazz as a desire to be castrated. He believed that surf boards, rock-n-roll, and popular culture in general were fetters of the "late capitalism" that de-spiritualized America and made it not very different socities that are openly dictatorial.

By and large, I think, Adorno's insights are not valid. He overgeneralizes. He is too Eurocentric, and especially, German-centric. He did not know great jazz musicians, such as Charlie Parker and Miles Davis, and he did not understand the American popular culture in general. He comes across as too speculative, gloomy, and Eurocentric.

1608 Webster street Oakland, CA. 9461

As a professional technical communicator, I found this book to be about middle of the road. The explanations are well done, but some of the cases are poorly researched. For example, in Chapter Five, an example letter has a product manager writing to a software vendor, asking that the program documentation be supplied. The software vendor responds that the programmers had somehow failed to write the documentation. This is nonsense; programmers don't write documentation, technical writers do. That aside, however, the good example/poor example format is very helpful to beginners. The section on oral presentations was very good, especially in the emphasis on audience research. The author again, however, undercuts herself by specifying "Windows-based presentation software", as if PowerPoint were the only presentation software on the planet.

All in all, this is a good first start for a beginner, but don't take everything here as gospel. The writer appears to be somewhat familiar with business practices, but betrays a bit of academic naivete from time to time.

I bought this book for two reasons. First, because I thought it would help me make some choices about my upcoming digital camera purchase. Second, because it was cheap. This book, as it turned out, would be perfect for someone who who has never used a camera at all. I assumed it would be geared more towards what functions to look for in a digital camera, and how to use it once I brought it home. It did neither. This book has a great chapter on how to take pictures. Unfortunately, that was not what I was looking for. I returned this book after I thumbed through it and found nothing useful.

I agree with "Disappointed" below, in that the title of this book is misleading. There are only a few pages devoted to digital cameras, with the real focus being the bare-essentials of cameras in general: primarily, the differences between 35mm, APS, and digital.

I must say though that there are some great pictures in the book, all full-color, and some of the techniques suggested are worth a look. I'd recommend this book for someone who was an absolute newbie (like I was a year ago!), and then recommend they pass it on to someone else when they're done.

This book is good if you get stuck on a particular word or concept, but it does not help you prepare for the MCAT. I'm not quite sure how I will use it yet!

This book is just a list of combined definitions from all sections in the MCAT. Although it does have some formulas well-organized in the back of the text, it's sort of worthless if you're looking for a cut-to-the-chase MCAT text. If you want an MCAT mini-dictionary, then this is your book. I thought it would be more of a breakdown of essential formulas and concepts, with examples of when use them, but it wasn't. My mistake I guess, but don't make the same one I did.

It is obvious that the author is totally unfamiliar with this field. First of all, he uses books which were totally discredited as support for his statements. Norman Henry Snaith, of the British and Foreign Bible Society, wrote a fake Bible in the late 50's. He had claimed to have uncovered the Ben Asher text in the Spanish Codex Or. 2626-28 of the British Museum. Now, this assertion might be true or untrue--the codex is certainly beautiful to behold, and no doubt a careful work of the late 14th century. However, the printed text Snaith produced is merely a reprinting of the Letteris Bible of 1866, with all of the same typos included! This is true despite the fact that Snaith claimed never to have used that Bible in his work. Miles B. Cohen and I proved this to all, at the meeting of the International Organization for Masoretic Studies in 1971, and we followed that presentation with a lengthy article published by H.U.C.A, volume 45, in 1974. Yet Mynatt uses Snaith as a constant reference for his footnotes in this book. There is no way that a pseudo-epigraph can be used as support for one's speculations. The current book shows total unfamiliarity with any knowledge of the subject matter. My 11-year old son knew things that Mynatt left open as a puzzle to be solved. For example, while Mynatt scratched his head over what could be another example of a proper noun which is repeated in the Bible (besides cases such as Avraham Avraham, Yaakov Yaakov, and Moshe Moshe), my 11 year old (and my wife) had no problem suggesting YHVH YHVH--a sentence repeated dozens of times during Rosh HaShan and Yom HaKipurim (and recited aloud on any festival or fast day, also). The questions raised by Mynatt are intriguing, but his answers are usually worthless. If anyone is interested in Masoretic riddles, then this book might be enjoyable to read. However, as a piece of scholarship it serves no useful purpose. In a more scholarly setting, I could easily answer all of these "problems." For this forum let it s

This book deals with an extremely recondite branch of Bible studies, namely possible problems with the massorah of the Torah printed in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgardensis. For those people who understand what this means and are interested, this book is quite valuable. It gives much useful information from a variety of sources, some of which are very difficult to access.

Despite the review by Freedman, the fact that it cites the Snaith Bible is not a problem since Mynatt only uses it as an alternative Hebrew bible to BHS and it would not affect his argument if he had used the Letteris Bible.