Ernest Rutherford contributed to the atomic theory by discovering that the atom is mostly empty space.
He can to that conclusion because he fired alpha particles at gold foil, which was so thin that it was only around .00004 cm thick, and while almost all shot straight through, some actually bounced back!
He likened it to shooting a 15-inch round(bullet) at tissue paper, only to have it bounce right back at you! Based on this, he theorized that the atom is mostly empty, which is why a majority of the particles passed right through, but in the very center of the atom there is a super-dense structure called a nucleus that held a majority of the atom's mass. This super-dense mass would be more than massive enough to deflect the particle, should they collide.
He wanted revenge against the gh government over the branch davidians
Option B is right that the to encourage people to settle in the colonies was the purpose of the Headright system.
Began in 1618 at Jamestown in Virginia, the Headright system was a method of granting the land legally. This system was created to attract immigrants and it was an attempt to solve scarcity of labor in Virginia, caused by the appearance of the tobacco economy. The Headrights were awarded to anyone who would agree to pay the shipping costs of the labor or slave. accordingly, colonists who were living in Virginia were given with two Headrights, and the migrated Colonists were awarded one Headright and the individuals received one Headright every time they paid for the journey of another individual. Plantation owners benefited from the Headright system when they met for the transportation of imported slaves. The increasing money amount required to bring bound slaves to the colonies and this contributed to the shift towards slavery in the colonies.
Answer:
To begin, we need to first grasp the basic terminology relevant to the study of religious minorities. Religious minorities are known as dhimmīs, short for ahl al-dhimmah, or people of the dhimmah, a term that later became synonymous with the People of the Book.[4] The original meaning of al-dhimmah, however, meant protection, and it was often short for dhimmat–Allah wa-rasūlih, or the “protection of God and His Prophet.”[5] In short, the concept originally had a divine connotation, or a meaning that was directly related to the power of God. However, the concept soon morphed into a technical legal term with the progression of classical scholarship, and it consequently lost its transcendent dimension.[6] As a result, ahl al-dhimmah, or people of the dhimmah, has become a legal term and not a reference to the recipients of divine protection. It is important to discuss the etymology of the word because it demonstrates the significance of the people of the dhimmah who, at the very root of it all, are people who were to be protected on behalf of God and His Prophet ﷺ – an immense responsibility. This status is awarded to People of the Book (who according to many scholars includes Zoroastrians and others) who agree through contract to pay the jizyah, or poll-tax, in exchange for that protection.[7] In sum, the formation of the people of the dhimmah was rooted in religious minorities paying a tax that exempted them from military service. Much more nuance can be embedded within all of these terms that are sometimes highly contested among scholars, but considering the limited scope of this paper, we will move forward to address the larger picture at hand.
The power of the Muslim state was dependent on its ability to provide two precious resources to its people: security and justice.[8] Christians and Jews and other minorities were not technically citizens of the Muslim state; they were considered outsiders under the protection of the state, leading to the title of dhimmah, or protected people.[9] Their protection was guaranteed in a number of ways: by providing them with legal autonomy – meaning they could maintain their religious practices without interference – and protection during war. That said, there have no doubt been incidents throughout history in which that protection was threatened or revoked and the Muslim ruler engaged in persecution of religious minorities.[10] The fact remains, however, that there was never widespread systematic persecution of Christians, for example, in the Islamic world as there was in the late Roman Empire.[11] And the hostile circumstances that did occasionally arise, were not due to Islamic legislation per se, but were rather a result of an amalgam of social, political, and economic circumstances. So while Christians historically at times suffered at the hands of Muslims, it was almost never a result of their being Christian, or their beliefs, but a result of various factors related to the pursuit of power.[12]
Explanation:
