In the story "The Storm," by Kate Chopin, what is the meaning of the title and how it relates to a theme of the story?

The title of Kate Chopin’s short story “The Storm” functions as a symbol that comments on the theme of female sexuality. In the story, female sexuality is recognized as both a choice and an empowering force. Ironically, it does this in two very different ways for the two female figures of the story.
From the moment we first meet her, Calixta is linked to a form of female sexuality. In a moment of foreshadowing that deepens the connection between the storm and sexuality, we learn that although Calixta “did not notice that approaching storm,” “she felt very warm and often stopped to mop her face on which the perspiration gathered in beads.” Moments later, her ex-lover, Alcée, appears at the door. 
The language used to describe the conditions produced by the storm is sensual in nature. We learn that it is “stifling hot,” and when a nearby bolt of lightning strikes, the language is particularly sexual:

Calixta put her hands to her eyes, and with a cry, staggered backward. Alcée's arm encircled her, and for an instant he drew her close and spasmodically to him.

Perhaps ironically, Calixta’s newly discovered sexuality does not seem to threaten her identity as a wife or a mother. In fact, it seems to strengthen it, as we learn that she is more patient with her family upon their return.
Conversely, the storm provides Clarisse with the power to escape from her sexual identity as Alcée’s wife. Although this movement is the opposite of Calixta’s in that Clarisse uses the storm to vacate her sexuality, the end result is the same. We learn that, in so doing, Clarisse is able to “restore the pleasant liberty of her maiden days.” For these two characters, the storm functions as a symbol of sexuality that achieves very similar ends through opposite means.

How is India flattening the world?

In The World Is Flat, Thomas L. Friedman doesn't precisely claim that India is "flattening the world," but rather that many features of business in India are examples of how the world is becoming flatter.
The term "flattening" is one Friedman uses to indicate removing barriers to globalization. He suggests that the first stage in this was the beginning of global exploration, when Europeans started to visit other continents and global trade became increasingly significant. The British colonization and domination of India led to extensive trade and thus could be considered part of this as it led to increasing the movement of goods and people between the two countries.
The twenty-first century marks the beginning of global competition and global supply chains, facilitated by advances in computing and communications, allowing seamless integration across vast geographical areas. India and China have been especially important in this, with India serving as a back end to data processing and call centers for many firms located in the US and Europe. Rather than industries competing locally, they now compete globally. 
Thus Friedman takes as a striking image of this flattening a wall screen in India's Infosys Technologies Limited offices and talks about how their global supply chain is support by the ability to be virtually present anywhere in the world via video conferencing. 

Single Variable Calculus, Chapter 7, 7.2-2, Section 7.2-2, Problem 38

Differentiate $f(x) = \ln (x^2 - 2x)$ and find the domain of $f$.



$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

\text{if } f(x) =& \ln (x^2 - 2x), \text{ then}
\\
\\
f'(x) =& \frac{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dx} (x^2 - 2x) }{x^2 -2x}
\\
\\
f'(x) =& \frac{2x - 2}{x^2 - 2x}

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


We know that $f(x)$ is a natural logarithmic function that is defined for $x^2 - 2x > 0$


$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}

& x( x - 2) > 0 \to (x > 0) \bigcap (x - 2 > 0)
\\
\\
& \text{Since } (x > 0) \bigcap (x - 2 > 0)
\\
\\
& \text{We have,}
\\
\\
& x < 0 \text{ and } x > 2

\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
$


Therefore, the domain of $f$ is

$(- \infty, 0) \bigcup (2, \infty)$

Without a curtain, how did Shakespeare and other playwrights signal the audience that a scene was over?

Shakespeare's plays generally lacked anything in the way of sets at all. There might be props which would be used to create sound effects, so that the audience could imagine that they were privy to a thunderstorm, for example, but the stage would generally be free of all but the most basic "furniture," and the audience would be quite used to imagining what was supposed to be going on behind the actors.
Note that in modern stagings of Shakespeare's plays, the curtain is not used to signal that a scene is over. The curtain will usually be pulled only when there is an interval in the proceedings. At the end of a scene in a modern production, however, we might see the lights dimmed, a feature to which Shakespeare's early plays did not have recourse. In some sparser modern productions, though, scene changes are still signaled in much the same basic way as they were in Shakespeare's day: when all the characters in a scene have left the stage—exeunt—then the scene is over. In his language, too, Shakespeare gives us an indication that a particular scene has been brought to a close, in that the final two lines of a scene are very frequently a rhyming couplet. This concluding rhyme gives a signal to the audience that this particular conversation, or incident, is over.

What do Walter's thoughts about George Murchison say about his personality in A Raisin in the Sun?

It's important to remember that Walter's initial attempt at contact with George is friendly, though it occurs in a rather eccentric circumstance.
In Act II, Scene One, George enters the apartment to pick Beneatha up for a date. Meanwhile, Beneatha and her brother are in the middle of mimicking what they consider to be an African ceremonial dance. Walter sees George, "extends his hand for the fraternal clasp," and is rejected when George exclaims, "Black Brother, hell!"
It also becomes clear from the dialogue between George Murchison and Beneatha that George is not interested in joining the wave of Afrocentrism that appeals to Beneatha. He is initially put off by her short, natural hair. He is also dismissive of black culture generally: "Let's face it, baby, your heritage is nothing but a bunch of raggedy-assed spirituals and some grass huts!"
Due to his snobbishness and his apparent self-hatred, it is rather easy to see George as unlikable. Walter, too, dislikes George, but also feels inferior to him due to the latter's education and airs of sophistication. For example, when George talks about theater conventions in New York and mentions, offhandedly, that he goes there several times a year, Walter dismisses the city, then lies and says that he, too, has been.
Walter then scrutinizes George's attire: a "casual tweed sports jacket over cashmere V-neck sweater over soft eyelet shirt and tie, and soft slacks, finished off with white buckskin shoes." It is an outfit that perfectly symbolizes Walter's derisive epithet: "Eastern." Walter refers to the shoes as "faggoty-looking." Because he cannot match George intellectually or culturally, his defense is to attack the young man's masculinity. He dismisses George's pursuit of the education Walter could never have:

I see you all the time—with the books tucked under your arms—going to your (British A—a mimic) "clahsses." And for what! What the hell are you learning over there? Filling up your heads...with the sociology and the psychology— but they teaching you how to be a man? How to take over and run the world? They teaching you how to run a rubber plantation or a steel mill? Naw—just to talk proper and read books and wear them faggoty-looking white shoes...

Walter, in this brief monologue, positions himself as a man of action, a man who is only interested in pursuing capital gain. On the other hand, in Walter's imagination, George is pretentious and wasteful of his time and energy. 
When George characterizes Walter as "bitter," Walter acknowledges that as true, and uses George's criticism to seek a point of connection:

And you—ain't you bitter, man? Ain't you just about had it yet? Don't you see no stars gleaming that you can't reach out and grab?

George ignores this plea for empathy and "crosses to Beneatha." He even changes his mind about her hair, after Walter registers his disapproval of her new cut.
The exchange with George reveals Walter's worst traits—his enviousness, his pettiness, and his covetousness. However, the dialogue also reveals his vulnerability. He wants to connect with George, the only black American male in the play who possesses some of the things that Walter wants. However, George, out of his own need to distance himself from Walter and what Walter represents, rebuffs him. George, in fact, ends the exchange by saying, "Goodnight, Prometheus," and exits the apartment. Walter is confused by the association and, instead of acknowledging that he does not know something, accuses George of being unable to "insult [him] man to man."
The exchange represents not only Walter's insecurities, but also the ways in which poor and middle-class black people have failed to connect; and how some middle-class black people have used their educations to dismiss poor blacks instead of helping them.

What were Napoleon's general aims?

Napoleon was an ambitious man who wanted to rule France singlehandedly and increase the French empire as far as possible. He was opportunistic. He came from humble roots but took advantage of the opportunities that presented themselves and rode them as far he could—to unprecedented power and prestige for a man of relatively simple beginnings.
Although the French Revolution gave him his chance, Napoleon had little interest in a Republic or shared rule. He wanted to be the dictator. He managed to disguise his dictatorship at first by becoming one of three consuls or rulers and by instituting the Constitution of the Year VIII. However, almost every bit of power under the constitution went to the First Consul, which was him.
Napoleon was an extraordinary military leader. He wanted to have the entire European continent under his control and initially had stunning successes, but he failed spectacularly to conquer Russia. He was also defeated in his attempt to invade England and gain control of the seas.
Napoleon, in general, wanted to be the dictator of a French empire that would be the greatest power on earth.

Napoleon Bonaparte is undoubtedly one of the greatest military commanders in history. He ascended from a civilian to the top of the political ladder and conquered nearly all of Europe during his heyday. He had high ambitions for both himself and his country.
His aim for himself was to become a powerful leader. Born into a poor family, Napoleon was not content with what had been determined for him by his social status. He desired for a change. He fought his way up, participated in the revolution, and defeated all his enemies until he obtained the throne. Then he continued to increase his power by making his country powerful.
His aim for the country was to make it powerful. Although he successfully overthrew the monarchy, his regime was not secure. The peace and stability of the country was constantly threatened by civil wars launched by political opponents and attacks from neighboring countries. He was responsible for improving the domestic economy, restoring social order, and defending the country from potential invasion. For Napoleon, military conquest seemed to be the best way to achieve these aims.

Why are myths, folklore, and mythical creatures very famous in movies? Why do we like to watch such movies?

Good question.
There are two very different answers to this question. The first is that the deep structure of myths is built into the way we tell stories. Some scholars have argued it is built into our minds. We see things in events in terms of the hero's journey. We look for these narrative structures in our experiences, and use them to make sense of what we go through, or what we see others going through. In the movies, some of these structures and mythic elements occur naturally or without conscious intent. Other times, as in Star Wars, movie creators consciously use mythic structures to structure their films in ways that generate stronger emotional responses.
 
The other reason myths and mythic creatures show up in films is more basic. Movie makers are always looking for new thrills, new threats, and new gimmicks. This includes looking for new monsters. Writers therefore pull creatures from myth systems around the world in search of novelty. Ancient monsters become the next new thing.
 
http://users.clas.ufl.edu/agordon/starwars.htm

https://ccas.creighton.edu/