SYNTHESIS THIN FILM ELECTRODES GRAPHENE VIA NOVEL 3D PRINTALBE TECHNIQUE AND DETERMINE PROPERTY ELECTROCHEMICAL

Graphene film electrodes have many important applications, but the fabriacion of these electrodes is difficult dues to the poor processing of graphene. This article describes the preliminary results of using 3D printing technology to fabricate thin-film electrodes from graphene oxide inks. Graphene oxide ink is synthesized by chemical method. The graphene oxide (GO) and reduction graphene oxide (r GO) thin film were chacracterized by filed scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) and Energy-dispersive X-ray spectrocopy (EDX spectrocopy) to make sure the morphological and optical characteristics of the thin film. In addition, the electrochemical aera active studies were also determined by cyclic voltametry (CV) curves. The r GO thin film displays higher electrochemical area active in comparison with GO, which is 2.56 cm2 compare to 0.31 cm2, indicating the best result for the superior conductivity of thin film electrode.

Original Acquisition and Unilateralism: Kant, Hegel, and Corrective Justice

Contemporary Kantians suggest that the original acquisition of property is problematic for Kant’s theory of private law. Kant requires that private law obligations be consistent with the equal freedom of everyone. However, a rule of original acquisition seems to favor the acquirer’s freedom over others’: the acquirer originally obtains property in an unowned object simply by taking control of it, and thus seems to impose obligations on everyone else (to respect the property right) through her own “unilateral” action or choice. This article first addresses proposed Kantian solutions to the supposed “unilateralism” problem, which involve the creation of a “civil condition” of public legal institutions to determine property rights. Such solutions make property rights a matter of distributive justice rather than corrective justice. Moreover, they cannot actually solve the unilateralism problem. But in any event, the supposed “unilateralism” problem is in fact no problem at all for Kant. This is because one person’s original acquisition does not limit others’ “freedom” in the Kantian sense of that term. In this respect Kant’s account of property is equivalent to Hegel’s, which contemporary Kantians have criticized for denying any problem of unilateralism. And both Kant and Hegel’s accounts are fully consistent with a theory that explains property as a matter of corrective, rather than distributive, justice.

„Kupi żywe oko”. Rozważania o etyce transplantacji

If my body is my property, then I have a right to use it according to my will: I can sell it, donate it, or destroy it. There is, however, an important difference between a living body and a dead body, which is often ignored in the discussion of transplantation ethics. I claim that my living body is not my property. However, this does not determine property status of my dead body and of all the cells, tissues, organs and body products extracted from my living body. Even if we accept ethics of solidarity and ban all commercial transactions in body parts, we shall still have a problem if it is possible to donate a living human eye. I analyse this question to conclude that although it is possible to maintain biological life in the extirpated eye it will be dead as a human seeing eye. I have to kill part of myself if I am to donate my living healthy eye. It explains our repulsion against donating or selling living eyes. Although transplantation medicine saves many lives, I think that in the long run it may bring more harm than benefit.

Constructive trusts over the family home: lessons to be learned from other commonwealth jurisdictions?

Ownership of the family home is usually not disputed until either the relationship between the spouses or cohabitants breakdown or there is a competing claim over the property by a third party. In such circumstances, determination of ownership rights becomes imperative. The Matrimonial Causes Act 1973 gives the courts adjustive powers to deal with disputes between spouses on the breakdown of the marriage. Notwithstanding this, there may be circumstances where it will be necessary or desirable to determine property rights between spouses. Furthermore, the adjustive powers of the courts are not applicable to cohabitants. Thus, in the absence of legal co-ownership in the family home, cohabitants and spouses who cannot rely on the 1973 Act will have to establish an equitable interest in the property. The analyses relied on are primarily based on property law and trusts principles and, more particularly, imputed trusts and proprietary estoppel. Under trusts principles, imputed trusts are usually taken to refer to resulting and constructive trusts.

Foundations of the State Principle

The state principle is an important and fundamental thermodynamic concept. Having only recently been formally stated, however, there is still some disagreement as to the basis of the principle’s derivation. An examination of various state principle presentations leads to the conclusion that the state principle must be based on the first and second laws, and, additionally, that the energy, the amounts of the constituents, and the parameters solely determine property. Microscopic properties and non-equilibrium states are not inherently governed by the state principle, but extensions have been formulated to incorporate these areas.