Find weak solution to Riemann problem for conservation law The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer...

Why does the nucleus not repel itself?

What does もの mean in this sentence?

Geography at the pixel level

Why did Peik say, "I'm not an animal"?

How can I define good in a religion that claims no moral authority?

What do these terms in Caesar's Gallic Wars mean?

How much of the clove should I use when using big garlic heads?

Why isn't the circumferential light around the M87 black hole's event horizon symmetric?

Are spiders unable to hurt humans, especially very small spiders?

For what reasons would an animal species NOT cross a *horizontal* land bridge?

Can an undergraduate be advised by a professor who is very far away?

What to do when moving next to a bird sanctuary with a loosely-domesticated cat?

How did passengers keep warm on sail ships?

What is this sharp, curved notch on my knife for?

Is there a way to generate a uniformly distributed point on a sphere from a fixed amount of random real numbers?

Button changing its text & action. Good or terrible?

Is it okay to consider publishing in my first year of PhD?

ELI5: Why they say that Israel would have been the fourth country to land a spacecraft on the Moon and why they call it low cost?

Did the UK government pay "millions and millions of dollars" to try to snag Julian Assange?

Why didn't the Event Horizon Telescope team mention Sagittarius A*?

What is the most efficient way to store a numeric range?

A female thief is not sold to make restitution -- so what happens instead?

How to add class in ko template in magento2

Is it ethical to upload a automatically generated paper to a non peer-reviewed site as part of a larger research?



Find weak solution to Riemann problem for conservation law



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InMethod of characteristics for Burgers' equation with rectangular dataEntropy Solution of the Burgers' EquationBurgers' Equation Shock SolutionsRiemann problem of nonconvex scalar conservation lawsShock-wave solution for PDE $u_t+(u-1)u_x=2$Conservation law $A_t + (A^{3/2})_x = 0$ for flood water waveFinding weak solutions of conservation law $u_t + (u^4)_x = 0$Rarefaction solution to Riemann problem for $x/t=0$Weak Solution to Conservation Lawreversibility scalar conservation lawWhat is the use of the notion of consistency for Riemann solvers?Riemann problem of nonconvex scalar conservation lawsConservation law and entropy condition problemFind the weak solution of the conservation lawThe Rankine-Hugoniot jump conditions for conservation and balance lawsDefinition of weak solution of a PDE that is given in the nondivergent formWeak solution for Burgers' equationShock of Burgers equation $u_t+uu_x=0$ at $t=0$












2












$begingroup$



Find the weak solution of the following conservation law
$$ u_t + (u^2)_x = 0 $$
with the initial condition
$$ u(x,0) = leftlbrace
begin{aligned}
&u_l & &text{if } x < 0 ,\
&u_r & &text{if } x > 0.
end{aligned}right. $$

Consider both cases $u_l>u_r$ and $u_l<u_r$. Fin the solution at $x=0$ in each case.




Attempt



We have equation: $u_t + 2 u u_x = 0 $ and characteristics are given by $t' = 1 $ and $x' = 2u $ and $u' = 0$ and so $u = const$, $t = s$, $x = 2 u s + r $ so that
$$ x = 2 u(x,0) t + r $$
are characteristicts. so that
$$ x = begin{cases} 2 u_l t + r, ; ; r < 0 \ 2 u_r t + r, ; ; r > 0 end{cases} $$
so thereis a shock formation at $x=0$. Any help in how to continue this problem?










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$

















    2












    $begingroup$



    Find the weak solution of the following conservation law
    $$ u_t + (u^2)_x = 0 $$
    with the initial condition
    $$ u(x,0) = leftlbrace
    begin{aligned}
    &u_l & &text{if } x < 0 ,\
    &u_r & &text{if } x > 0.
    end{aligned}right. $$

    Consider both cases $u_l>u_r$ and $u_l<u_r$. Fin the solution at $x=0$ in each case.




    Attempt



    We have equation: $u_t + 2 u u_x = 0 $ and characteristics are given by $t' = 1 $ and $x' = 2u $ and $u' = 0$ and so $u = const$, $t = s$, $x = 2 u s + r $ so that
    $$ x = 2 u(x,0) t + r $$
    are characteristicts. so that
    $$ x = begin{cases} 2 u_l t + r, ; ; r < 0 \ 2 u_r t + r, ; ; r > 0 end{cases} $$
    so thereis a shock formation at $x=0$. Any help in how to continue this problem?










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$















      2












      2








      2


      4



      $begingroup$



      Find the weak solution of the following conservation law
      $$ u_t + (u^2)_x = 0 $$
      with the initial condition
      $$ u(x,0) = leftlbrace
      begin{aligned}
      &u_l & &text{if } x < 0 ,\
      &u_r & &text{if } x > 0.
      end{aligned}right. $$

      Consider both cases $u_l>u_r$ and $u_l<u_r$. Fin the solution at $x=0$ in each case.




      Attempt



      We have equation: $u_t + 2 u u_x = 0 $ and characteristics are given by $t' = 1 $ and $x' = 2u $ and $u' = 0$ and so $u = const$, $t = s$, $x = 2 u s + r $ so that
      $$ x = 2 u(x,0) t + r $$
      are characteristicts. so that
      $$ x = begin{cases} 2 u_l t + r, ; ; r < 0 \ 2 u_r t + r, ; ; r > 0 end{cases} $$
      so thereis a shock formation at $x=0$. Any help in how to continue this problem?










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$





      Find the weak solution of the following conservation law
      $$ u_t + (u^2)_x = 0 $$
      with the initial condition
      $$ u(x,0) = leftlbrace
      begin{aligned}
      &u_l & &text{if } x < 0 ,\
      &u_r & &text{if } x > 0.
      end{aligned}right. $$

      Consider both cases $u_l>u_r$ and $u_l<u_r$. Fin the solution at $x=0$ in each case.




      Attempt



      We have equation: $u_t + 2 u u_x = 0 $ and characteristics are given by $t' = 1 $ and $x' = 2u $ and $u' = 0$ and so $u = const$, $t = s$, $x = 2 u s + r $ so that
      $$ x = 2 u(x,0) t + r $$
      are characteristicts. so that
      $$ x = begin{cases} 2 u_l t + r, ; ; r < 0 \ 2 u_r t + r, ; ; r > 0 end{cases} $$
      so thereis a shock formation at $x=0$. Any help in how to continue this problem?







      pde hyperbolic-equations






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited Mar 25 at 7:52









      Harry49

      8,73431345




      8,73431345










      asked Mar 22 at 0:29









      JamesJames

      2,636425




      2,636425






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          4





          +150







          $begingroup$

          This is very similar to the Riemann problem of the inviscid Burgers' equation (see e.g. (1), (2), (3), (4) and related posts). For this type of problem, weak solutions are not unique. Thus, I guess that the problem statement asks for the entropy solution. I will provide a detailed general answer for the case of conservation laws $u_t + f(u)_x = 0$ with Riemann data $u(x<0,0) = u_l$ and $u(x>0,0) = u_r$, where the flux $f$ is smooth and either convex or concave. If the flux has inflection points, the more general solution is provided here.



          In the case of convex or concave flux $f$, there are only two possible types of waves:




          • shock waves. If the solution is a shock wave with speed $s$,
            $$
            u(x,t) = leftlbracebegin{aligned}
            &u_l & &text{if } x < s t, \
            &u_r & &text{if } st < x,
            end{aligned}right.
            $$

            then the speed of shock must satisfy the Rankine-Hugoniot jump condition $s = frac{f(u_l)-f(u_r)}{u_l-u_r}$. Moreover, to be admissible, the shock wave must satisfy the Lax entropy condition $f'(u_l) > s > f'(u_r)$,
            where $f'$ denotes the derivative of $f$.


          • rarefaction waves. The are obtained from the self-similarity Ansatz $u(x,t) = v(xi)$ with $xi = x/t$, which leads to the identity $f'(v(xi)) = xi$. Since $f'$ is an increasing function, we can invert the previous equation to find $v(xi) = (f')^{-1}(xi)$. The final solution reads
            $$
            u(x,t) = leftlbracebegin{aligned}
            &u_l & &text{if } x leq f'(u_l) t, \
            &(f')^{-1}(x/t) & &text{if } f'(u_l) t leq x leq f'(u_r) t, \
            &u_r & &text{if } f'(u_r) t leq x,
            end{aligned}right.
            $$

            where $(f')^{-1}$ denotes the reciprocal function of $f'$. One notes that this solution requires $f'(u_l) leq f'(u_r)$.





          In the present case, the flux $f: u mapsto u^2$ is a smooth convex function, so that its derivative $f':umapsto 2u$ is increasing. Shock waves are obtained for $u_l geq u_r$ (cf. Lax entropy condition), and rarefaction waves are obtained for $u_l leq u_r$. In the first case, the shock speed deduced from the Rankine-Hugoniot condition reads $s = u_l + u_r$. The value of the solution at $x=0$ for positive times is $u_r$ if $s < 0$, and $u_l$ otherwise. In the second case, the reciprocal of the derivative is given by $(f')^{-1} : xi mapsto xi/2$. The value of the solution at $x=0$ for positive times is $u_r$ if $u_r < 0$, $u_l$ if $u_l > 0$, and $0$ otherwise (i.e., if $u_l < 0 < u_r $).






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            there is another bounty here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/3157673/…
            $endgroup$
            – Mikey Spivak
            Mar 25 at 8:00












          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3157585%2ffind-weak-solution-to-riemann-problem-for-conservation-law%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4





          +150







          $begingroup$

          This is very similar to the Riemann problem of the inviscid Burgers' equation (see e.g. (1), (2), (3), (4) and related posts). For this type of problem, weak solutions are not unique. Thus, I guess that the problem statement asks for the entropy solution. I will provide a detailed general answer for the case of conservation laws $u_t + f(u)_x = 0$ with Riemann data $u(x<0,0) = u_l$ and $u(x>0,0) = u_r$, where the flux $f$ is smooth and either convex or concave. If the flux has inflection points, the more general solution is provided here.



          In the case of convex or concave flux $f$, there are only two possible types of waves:




          • shock waves. If the solution is a shock wave with speed $s$,
            $$
            u(x,t) = leftlbracebegin{aligned}
            &u_l & &text{if } x < s t, \
            &u_r & &text{if } st < x,
            end{aligned}right.
            $$

            then the speed of shock must satisfy the Rankine-Hugoniot jump condition $s = frac{f(u_l)-f(u_r)}{u_l-u_r}$. Moreover, to be admissible, the shock wave must satisfy the Lax entropy condition $f'(u_l) > s > f'(u_r)$,
            where $f'$ denotes the derivative of $f$.


          • rarefaction waves. The are obtained from the self-similarity Ansatz $u(x,t) = v(xi)$ with $xi = x/t$, which leads to the identity $f'(v(xi)) = xi$. Since $f'$ is an increasing function, we can invert the previous equation to find $v(xi) = (f')^{-1}(xi)$. The final solution reads
            $$
            u(x,t) = leftlbracebegin{aligned}
            &u_l & &text{if } x leq f'(u_l) t, \
            &(f')^{-1}(x/t) & &text{if } f'(u_l) t leq x leq f'(u_r) t, \
            &u_r & &text{if } f'(u_r) t leq x,
            end{aligned}right.
            $$

            where $(f')^{-1}$ denotes the reciprocal function of $f'$. One notes that this solution requires $f'(u_l) leq f'(u_r)$.





          In the present case, the flux $f: u mapsto u^2$ is a smooth convex function, so that its derivative $f':umapsto 2u$ is increasing. Shock waves are obtained for $u_l geq u_r$ (cf. Lax entropy condition), and rarefaction waves are obtained for $u_l leq u_r$. In the first case, the shock speed deduced from the Rankine-Hugoniot condition reads $s = u_l + u_r$. The value of the solution at $x=0$ for positive times is $u_r$ if $s < 0$, and $u_l$ otherwise. In the second case, the reciprocal of the derivative is given by $(f')^{-1} : xi mapsto xi/2$. The value of the solution at $x=0$ for positive times is $u_r$ if $u_r < 0$, $u_l$ if $u_l > 0$, and $0$ otherwise (i.e., if $u_l < 0 < u_r $).






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            there is another bounty here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/3157673/…
            $endgroup$
            – Mikey Spivak
            Mar 25 at 8:00
















          4





          +150







          $begingroup$

          This is very similar to the Riemann problem of the inviscid Burgers' equation (see e.g. (1), (2), (3), (4) and related posts). For this type of problem, weak solutions are not unique. Thus, I guess that the problem statement asks for the entropy solution. I will provide a detailed general answer for the case of conservation laws $u_t + f(u)_x = 0$ with Riemann data $u(x<0,0) = u_l$ and $u(x>0,0) = u_r$, where the flux $f$ is smooth and either convex or concave. If the flux has inflection points, the more general solution is provided here.



          In the case of convex or concave flux $f$, there are only two possible types of waves:




          • shock waves. If the solution is a shock wave with speed $s$,
            $$
            u(x,t) = leftlbracebegin{aligned}
            &u_l & &text{if } x < s t, \
            &u_r & &text{if } st < x,
            end{aligned}right.
            $$

            then the speed of shock must satisfy the Rankine-Hugoniot jump condition $s = frac{f(u_l)-f(u_r)}{u_l-u_r}$. Moreover, to be admissible, the shock wave must satisfy the Lax entropy condition $f'(u_l) > s > f'(u_r)$,
            where $f'$ denotes the derivative of $f$.


          • rarefaction waves. The are obtained from the self-similarity Ansatz $u(x,t) = v(xi)$ with $xi = x/t$, which leads to the identity $f'(v(xi)) = xi$. Since $f'$ is an increasing function, we can invert the previous equation to find $v(xi) = (f')^{-1}(xi)$. The final solution reads
            $$
            u(x,t) = leftlbracebegin{aligned}
            &u_l & &text{if } x leq f'(u_l) t, \
            &(f')^{-1}(x/t) & &text{if } f'(u_l) t leq x leq f'(u_r) t, \
            &u_r & &text{if } f'(u_r) t leq x,
            end{aligned}right.
            $$

            where $(f')^{-1}$ denotes the reciprocal function of $f'$. One notes that this solution requires $f'(u_l) leq f'(u_r)$.





          In the present case, the flux $f: u mapsto u^2$ is a smooth convex function, so that its derivative $f':umapsto 2u$ is increasing. Shock waves are obtained for $u_l geq u_r$ (cf. Lax entropy condition), and rarefaction waves are obtained for $u_l leq u_r$. In the first case, the shock speed deduced from the Rankine-Hugoniot condition reads $s = u_l + u_r$. The value of the solution at $x=0$ for positive times is $u_r$ if $s < 0$, and $u_l$ otherwise. In the second case, the reciprocal of the derivative is given by $(f')^{-1} : xi mapsto xi/2$. The value of the solution at $x=0$ for positive times is $u_r$ if $u_r < 0$, $u_l$ if $u_l > 0$, and $0$ otherwise (i.e., if $u_l < 0 < u_r $).






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$













          • $begingroup$
            there is another bounty here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/3157673/…
            $endgroup$
            – Mikey Spivak
            Mar 25 at 8:00














          4





          +150







          4





          +150



          4




          +150



          $begingroup$

          This is very similar to the Riemann problem of the inviscid Burgers' equation (see e.g. (1), (2), (3), (4) and related posts). For this type of problem, weak solutions are not unique. Thus, I guess that the problem statement asks for the entropy solution. I will provide a detailed general answer for the case of conservation laws $u_t + f(u)_x = 0$ with Riemann data $u(x<0,0) = u_l$ and $u(x>0,0) = u_r$, where the flux $f$ is smooth and either convex or concave. If the flux has inflection points, the more general solution is provided here.



          In the case of convex or concave flux $f$, there are only two possible types of waves:




          • shock waves. If the solution is a shock wave with speed $s$,
            $$
            u(x,t) = leftlbracebegin{aligned}
            &u_l & &text{if } x < s t, \
            &u_r & &text{if } st < x,
            end{aligned}right.
            $$

            then the speed of shock must satisfy the Rankine-Hugoniot jump condition $s = frac{f(u_l)-f(u_r)}{u_l-u_r}$. Moreover, to be admissible, the shock wave must satisfy the Lax entropy condition $f'(u_l) > s > f'(u_r)$,
            where $f'$ denotes the derivative of $f$.


          • rarefaction waves. The are obtained from the self-similarity Ansatz $u(x,t) = v(xi)$ with $xi = x/t$, which leads to the identity $f'(v(xi)) = xi$. Since $f'$ is an increasing function, we can invert the previous equation to find $v(xi) = (f')^{-1}(xi)$. The final solution reads
            $$
            u(x,t) = leftlbracebegin{aligned}
            &u_l & &text{if } x leq f'(u_l) t, \
            &(f')^{-1}(x/t) & &text{if } f'(u_l) t leq x leq f'(u_r) t, \
            &u_r & &text{if } f'(u_r) t leq x,
            end{aligned}right.
            $$

            where $(f')^{-1}$ denotes the reciprocal function of $f'$. One notes that this solution requires $f'(u_l) leq f'(u_r)$.





          In the present case, the flux $f: u mapsto u^2$ is a smooth convex function, so that its derivative $f':umapsto 2u$ is increasing. Shock waves are obtained for $u_l geq u_r$ (cf. Lax entropy condition), and rarefaction waves are obtained for $u_l leq u_r$. In the first case, the shock speed deduced from the Rankine-Hugoniot condition reads $s = u_l + u_r$. The value of the solution at $x=0$ for positive times is $u_r$ if $s < 0$, and $u_l$ otherwise. In the second case, the reciprocal of the derivative is given by $(f')^{-1} : xi mapsto xi/2$. The value of the solution at $x=0$ for positive times is $u_r$ if $u_r < 0$, $u_l$ if $u_l > 0$, and $0$ otherwise (i.e., if $u_l < 0 < u_r $).






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$



          This is very similar to the Riemann problem of the inviscid Burgers' equation (see e.g. (1), (2), (3), (4) and related posts). For this type of problem, weak solutions are not unique. Thus, I guess that the problem statement asks for the entropy solution. I will provide a detailed general answer for the case of conservation laws $u_t + f(u)_x = 0$ with Riemann data $u(x<0,0) = u_l$ and $u(x>0,0) = u_r$, where the flux $f$ is smooth and either convex or concave. If the flux has inflection points, the more general solution is provided here.



          In the case of convex or concave flux $f$, there are only two possible types of waves:




          • shock waves. If the solution is a shock wave with speed $s$,
            $$
            u(x,t) = leftlbracebegin{aligned}
            &u_l & &text{if } x < s t, \
            &u_r & &text{if } st < x,
            end{aligned}right.
            $$

            then the speed of shock must satisfy the Rankine-Hugoniot jump condition $s = frac{f(u_l)-f(u_r)}{u_l-u_r}$. Moreover, to be admissible, the shock wave must satisfy the Lax entropy condition $f'(u_l) > s > f'(u_r)$,
            where $f'$ denotes the derivative of $f$.


          • rarefaction waves. The are obtained from the self-similarity Ansatz $u(x,t) = v(xi)$ with $xi = x/t$, which leads to the identity $f'(v(xi)) = xi$. Since $f'$ is an increasing function, we can invert the previous equation to find $v(xi) = (f')^{-1}(xi)$. The final solution reads
            $$
            u(x,t) = leftlbracebegin{aligned}
            &u_l & &text{if } x leq f'(u_l) t, \
            &(f')^{-1}(x/t) & &text{if } f'(u_l) t leq x leq f'(u_r) t, \
            &u_r & &text{if } f'(u_r) t leq x,
            end{aligned}right.
            $$

            where $(f')^{-1}$ denotes the reciprocal function of $f'$. One notes that this solution requires $f'(u_l) leq f'(u_r)$.





          In the present case, the flux $f: u mapsto u^2$ is a smooth convex function, so that its derivative $f':umapsto 2u$ is increasing. Shock waves are obtained for $u_l geq u_r$ (cf. Lax entropy condition), and rarefaction waves are obtained for $u_l leq u_r$. In the first case, the shock speed deduced from the Rankine-Hugoniot condition reads $s = u_l + u_r$. The value of the solution at $x=0$ for positive times is $u_r$ if $s < 0$, and $u_l$ otherwise. In the second case, the reciprocal of the derivative is given by $(f')^{-1} : xi mapsto xi/2$. The value of the solution at $x=0$ for positive times is $u_r$ if $u_r < 0$, $u_l$ if $u_l > 0$, and $0$ otherwise (i.e., if $u_l < 0 < u_r $).







          share|cite|improve this answer














          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer








          edited Mar 27 at 17:19

























          answered Mar 25 at 7:50









          Harry49Harry49

          8,73431345




          8,73431345












          • $begingroup$
            there is another bounty here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/3157673/…
            $endgroup$
            – Mikey Spivak
            Mar 25 at 8:00


















          • $begingroup$
            there is another bounty here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/3157673/…
            $endgroup$
            – Mikey Spivak
            Mar 25 at 8:00
















          $begingroup$
          there is another bounty here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/3157673/…
          $endgroup$
          – Mikey Spivak
          Mar 25 at 8:00




          $begingroup$
          there is another bounty here: math.stackexchange.com/questions/3157673/…
          $endgroup$
          – Mikey Spivak
          Mar 25 at 8:00


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3157585%2ffind-weak-solution-to-riemann-problem-for-conservation-law%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Nidaros erkebispedøme

          Birsay

          Was Woodrow Wilson really a Liberal?Was World War I a war of liberals against authoritarians?Founding Fathers...