History Sir Isaac Newton; His Three Laws of Motion Isaac Newton was born on Christmas day in 1642, in Lincolnshire, England. Newton attended Trinity College in 1661 and had both his Bachelor of Arts and his Master of Arts by 1669. That same year he became the associate of the French Academy of Sciences. He was elected to Parilment, then appointed a warden, and finally, President of the Royal Society. Newton was a master of science and mathematics.

He discovered calculus, before Leibniz’ became popular. Perhaps Newton’s most popular discovery, though, was gravity. As the story goes, Sir Isaac Newton was resting under a tree one day in his garden, when an apple fell from it and hit him on the head. Thus, he discovered gravity. The earth’s gravitational pull pulls objects toward it.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

However, many people believe that this is only a myth created to simply illustrate Newton’s discovery. Along with Newton’s many discoveries, the three laws of motion are famous. These include inertia, acceleration, and the idea that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Inertia is the idea that a body in motion will remain in motion, and a body at rest will remain at rest. For example, if I were to throw a baseball into the air, it would keep going until grasvity pulled it back down to earth.

However, if I left it sitting on a table, it would lie there until some kind of force were to move it. If I were to push a skateboard across the floor with all of my might, the skateboard would accelerate more than if I gave it a light shove, simply because there was more force behind it. More force = more acceleration. If I were sitting on a swing and someone were to grab hold of the swing, pull it backwards, and release, I would move forward in the opposite direction. This demonstrates the idea that, for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.


Spanish settlement of the west
International borders have always been centers of conflict, and the
U.S.-Mexican border is no exception. With the European colonizing the New
World, it was a matter of time before the powers collided. The Spanish
settled what is today Mexico, while the English settled what is to day the
United States. When the two colonial powers did meet what is today the
United States Southwest, it was not England and Spain. Rather the two
powers were the United States and Mexico. Both Counties had broken off from
their mother countries. The conflict that erupted between the two countries
where a direct result of different nation policies. The United States had a
policy of westward expansion, while Mexico had a policy of self protection.

The Americans never had a written policy of expansion. What they had was
the idea of “Manifest Destiny.” Manifest Destiny was the belief that the
United States had the right to expand westward to the Pacific ocean. On the
other hand, Mexico was a new country wanting to protect itself from outside
powers. Evidence of U.S. expansion is seen with the independence of Texas
from Mexico. The strongest evidence of U.S. expansion goals is with the
Mexican-American War. From the beginning, the war was conceived as an
opportunity for land expansion. Mexico feared the United States expansion

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

During the 16th century, the Spanish began to settle the region. The
Spanish had all ready conquered and settled Central Mexico. Now they wanted
to expand their land holdings north. The first expedition into the region,
that is today the United States Southwest, was with Corando. Corando
reported a region rich in resources, soon after people started to settle the
region. The driving force behind the settlement was silver in the region.
The Spanish settled the region through three major corridors; central,
western and eastern. The first settlements were mainly through the central
corridor. The Spanish went thorough what is now the modern Mexican state of
Chihuahua into the U.S. state of New Mexico. Eventually the Spanish
established the city of Santa Fe in 1689. The eastern corridor was through
modern day Texas and led to the establishment of San Antonio. The eastern
expansion was caused by the French expansion into modern day Louisiana. The
Spanish crown wanted a buffer between the French in Louisiana and central
Mexico. The last corridor of expansion was in the west, through the sea,
which led to the establishment of San Diego in 1769 and Los Angles in 1781.
The Spanish were not the only European power to colonize the new world;
French, English and the Dutch also settled North and South America. The
Spanish and the French settled what is present day U.S.-Mexico border region.

The French settled modern day U.S. midwest, while the Spanish settled
present day Mexico and U.S. southwest. As time went on, European influence
in the region diminished.. The French sold there claims to the United
States, in 1803 with the Louisiana Purchase.Mexico gained independence
from Spain in 1821. Once the United States bought the Louisiana Purchase,
western expansion began. This set the stage for major conflict in the
The United States gained independence from England in 1775. After 1775, the
Americans started to expand west. By the time Mexico gained independence,
the United States had reached the Mexican frontier. Mexico needed to protect
its northern borders. To protect the border region, Mexico needed to
populate the area. Mexico continued the policy started by Spain of allowing
Americans to settle Texas. The Americans had to follow Mexican law, religion
and customs. The settlement of Texas played into the United States
expansion plans.

Eventually Mexico City closed Texas from more Americans from entering.

This angered the Americans wanting to enter and Americans already living in
Texas. Texas revolted from Mexico in 1833. Mexicans did live in Texas, and
fought for the independence of Texas. The majority of Texans were Americans
and fought for their independence. After the war the Americans intentionally
or non-intentionally forced most Mexicans out of Texas. The ones that stayed
faced racial tensions that continue to today.

After gaining independence from Mexico, Texas wanted to join the United
States immediately. The U.S. Congress voted against Texas from joining the
Union. Congress was worried that annexation of Texas would anger Mexico.

Mexico had never officially recognized Texas as independent. Congress was
concerned that annexation would start a war with Mexico. Mexicos repose to
American annexation was not the only factor in deciding against annexation.

If Texas was to become a state, it would be a slave state. At the time, the
United States an even balance between slave and non-slave states. Texas
entering the Union would disrupt the balance, giving slave states an
advantage in the U.S. House and Senate. Since the United States was not
ready to annex Texas, Texas declared itself a sovereign country. In 1837
President Andrew Jackson formally recognized Texas a country.
Texas wanted to be part of the United States. It needed the protection of
the Untied States. President Tyler could not get the 2/3 majority needed to
admit Texas. Instead, he changed the law to require only a simple majority.

It was not until 1845 and two Presidents later that Texas was annexed into
the United States. Mexico protested the admission of Texas into the United
States. The United States saw Mexicos protest as a excuse to spend troops
into Texas
The annexation of Texas was a represented the United States expansion goals.

The United States wanted to settle in Texas, but Mexico owned the land.

That did not matter to the United States, they settled in the region
regardless. The Americans that settled the region agreed to Mexican law and
customs, but still considered themselves Americans. After the annexation of
Texas, Texas also wanted to expand. Texas claimed that New Mexico and
California were part of Texas. The boundary with Mexico was also disputed.

The United States claimed that the Texas border was at the Rio Grande.

Mexico disagreed, Mexico stated the border was at Nueces River. The United
States did try to settle matters diplomatically. The United States sent
inexperienced diplomat John Slidell. Slidell tried to buy area known as the
U.S. Southwest. Slidell, being an inexperienced diplomat, was rejected. Not
only was he not successful in buying the land, he aroused Mexican fears. This
set the stage for the Mexican-American War.

. The United States also had no written policy of expansion, but the
government quietly supported it. The United States has always had troops the
region, even though they held no land in the region The United States kept
ships off the coast of California. In 1842 the U.S. commander in the region,
Commodore Thomas Jones, attacked and took the city of Monterrey in
California. He falsely believed that Texas and Mexico were at war. Once he
realized his mistake he withdrew his forces and apologized to the Mexian
government for his action and claimed that he did not act with orders from
the U.S. government.
Although Jones claimed that he did not act with orders from the U.S.

government, clearly the government did not stop the practice. Another
example of the United States expansion goals was the Mexican-American War.

This is the first time America has fought a war with land expansion as its
main goal. The war started on April 25 1846 with the attack from Mexican
troops and the counter attack from General Taylor of the U.S. Army. Taylor
sent a message to President Polk that hostilities have started. President
Polk, with a pre-drafted declaration of war, asked Congress to declare war
against Mexico. President Polk knew that Mexico would lose the war and would
gain new lands in the end.
The Mexican-American war lasted two years, and ended with the signing of the
Treaty of Guadeloupe on February 2 1848. The United States had succeeded in
winning the war. With the Treaty of Guadeloupe the United States had
succeeded in completing its Manifest Destiny. The Treaty itself represented
the United States expansion goals. The United States wanted to settle on
were the international border was to be. Mexico wanted the border to north
of the Rio Grande river, but finally decided upon the middle of the Rio
Grande river. Mexico having been bankrupt from the war, agreed to take the
15 million as payment for the vast land. In addition, the United States
agreed to pay off all Mexican debts owed to the United States. This amount
was small in comparison to what the United States gained in territory. The
United States took advantage of a weak country of obtained its expansion

Another example of the United States taking advantage of Mexico is the
Gasden Purchase. The Gasden Purchase was ratified in 1854 for the selling
price of 10 million. Mexico was going through rough economical time and
desperately needed the money. The United States seeing an opportunity to
build a railroad through the region brought the land at a cheap price. The
selling of the Gasden Purchase was the down fall of President Santa Ana, and
led to his replacement.

The conflicts along the border region were a direct result of U.S.

expansion policies and Mexican fear for the United States. The Americans saw
Manifest Destiny, westward expansion, as there God given right. The United
States proved often that it supported policy of expansion. With the
Mexican-American war, the United States completed it’s Manifest Destiny. The
United States completed Manifest Destiny at the cost of the Mexican
government and its people.


.. antages of having a company that is totally debt free. Opportunities: The possible opportunities available to Coca-Cola are limitless due to their strong market position and the healthy profits that they consistently turn. Coke has begun to realize that they are capable of expanding into other markets besides that of the soft drink. This is the focus of the Minute Maid group.

The worldwide juice beverage business is growing, with sales of more than $40 billion annually. The destination of The Minute Maid Company is to be The Coca-Cola Company of juices, worldwide, and capture category growth with global brands, premium products and a superior business system (Ivestor). This is a very good opportunity for Coke to move into the next millennium where consumers are becoming more heath conscious. European markets also offer tremendous potential for growth. One statistic underscores our enormous opportunity in this group: On average, each of the 866 million consumers in the 49 countries of the Greater Europe group drinks our products less than twice a week. We’ve set an aggressive goal of reaching a per capita of 200 within the next decade (Ivestor).

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

In this case the lack of a strong customer base is actually a great opportunity. Coke has realized that they are deficient in this area and are taking the appropriate step to attempt to secure for them a place in this market. Similar to the place they hold in the United States and other regions of the world as well. Strategically speaking this is a good idea, and Coke knows from prior experience in their 113-year history how to break into a new market. China and the Far East also show a very large potential for growth.

China is currently the world’s most populous country. By default China is also the largest consumer of food and beverage. This plays very nicely into Coke’s attempts to gain market shares in this region. With 60 percent of the world’s population, this group has a huge opportunity to increase per capita consumption of our products. Of the 3.6 billion potential consumers here, each is currently drinking less than one serving of our products every two weeks on average (Ivestor). Threats: One of the largest threats that is facing Coca-Cola today is the regional economy in some of the geographic areas in which the company operates.

Coke has voiced concerns that the down turn in these economies has had a negative effect on their business in the last year. Coke holds the position that it is a long-term company and that this is just a temporary downturn. This could have a negative effect on the company if this so-called temporary downturn turns into a regional recession. People today are attempting to live a healthier life style than their parents did in the past. One of the first things that people tend to cut out of their diet are complex sugars such as those found in the high fructose corn syrup.

In order for Coke to stay viable they are again going to need to develop a new product that would both address the health concerns of the people and also maintain the taste and texture of the original Coke. A flaw in this plan could be the lost faith that the American public has in Coke after the New Coke product flop of the mid 80’s. The facts remain though that eventually the consumers will turn from this old product that is high in sugar and promotes tooth decay to a healthier alternative. In Belgium after an incident where a bottler used the wrong type of carbon dioxide to bottle the product all Coca-Cola was removed from the shelves pursuant of a government ban enacted by the Minister of Health. The carbon dioxide that was used was mixed with a fungicide and was meant to treat wooden pallets against mildew. A hundred or so people were rendered sick by this mistake, mostly small children.

The product was also removed from the shelves in the Netherlands, and France. Coke has taken steps to try to win back their customers. Some of these steps include trying to assure the people in the European market place that the bottling plant in question was thoroughly cleaned and tested, and also that the tainted product was destroyed. Coke needs to strongly assure the Belgium people that their product is safe, and also take steps to make sure that an incident like this has no chance what so ever of happening again. Competition: Coke does hold a majority of the market share in the soft drink industry.

Pepsi Corporation is attempting to cut into this lead. They are doing this through a very aggressive marketing campaign that is targeted mainly at the younger 13-25 year old demographic. Pepsi’s plan is not to make customers out of Coke drinkers but is to make new customers out of people who currently don’t have a cola preference. Pepsi is also attempting to match Coca-Cola country for country in a global battle for control. The generic soda products that many stores seem to have are digging a small hole in Coca-Colas profits.

These stores’ strategies are to offer a similar product of similar quality at a much lower cost. Sometimes the cost is less than half that of brand name colas such as Coke. This is a marketing strategy known as market penetration. This strategy allows a product at a lower price to reach a larger market due to its lower cost. Fortunately these generic store brands do not have the brand recognition that Coke has, therefore these generic brands should not be a very serious threat to the overall stability of the Coca-Cola empire.

But this issue is also one that Coke would be wise to watch just so they don’t get taken by surprise if there happens to be a swing in the markets to these generic brands. The Minute Maid group has its own competition that is unique to their particular market. The new players in this game are the Florida Orange Growers Co-op. This is a group of growers that are collaborating in an effort to produce a very high quality juice for a competitive price. The grass roots promotions that this group is using appeals directly to the heartland of this country. And is stealing market share in the orange juice industry by the month.

Coke should attempt to counteract this by either launching its own grass roots ad campaign such as it uses to sell Classic Coke or possibly talk to the growers and work a deal with the that allows then higher profits and more credit. Recommendations: As mentioned before Coca-Cola is a very cash rich company that carries very little debt and turns a very sizable net profit. Currently Coke has limited itself to the beverage industry. This in the past has been a very safe move that has been good for Coke. However the face of the global economy is changing on a grand scale. If Coke were to found a venture capital group to invest in new ideas and companies that show extraordinary potential for growth.

Coke could staff this small group with the best business and technical minds that it can find. Coke would be well served to follow the guidelines on diversification set out in the book Management by Dr. Zivic. This book has a section that covers in great detail the reason why a company should diversify and how such a plan could be implemented. The New division could share the management infrastructure of Coca-Cola and their financial resources. In return by investing in the newest technologies and ideas this new division would have the potential to become even larger than its soft drink counterpart.

The justification for this is that gaining market share in the soft drink is very difficult. Conversely, in high technology fields gaining market share is as simple as having the best product. Coke would be well served to invest in an idea similar to this. All of the components are there for them to become a major player in the high technology field. The only piece of the puzzle that they are missing is the foresight to diversify into such an area. In the interest of credibility Coke would be wise to name this group something not identifiable with the parent company.

On the soft drink side of the business Coke should continue along the road to success that they started on over 100 years ago. It has been successful to this point and appears that it will remain successful well into the future. Places where it may be better to modify this plan to sell more products are in the European and Asian markets. Currently this plan is not selling as much product as it is in other sections of the world. A solution to this could be to research what the consumer wants in these regions and then act on this research to give the consumer exactly what they want. Alternatives: Recovering natural disasters have always sponsored a time of community and kinship from among those affected.

Many large companies such as Philip Morris spend a good deal of money assisting in any way that they can when a situation like this happens. If a company was to put together a natural disaster recovery team to go in and aid in the recovery of the affected people, Coke may be able to change their image from corporate giant into a carrying member of the global community. The key for this program is for it to be truly sincere, not a publicity stunt. This could be accomplished by Coke showing up and helping in a very big way, but not advertising that they did assist. They could even downplay their involvement. The more modest the company is about their involvement the more positively responsive people will be toward Coke.

The way that this team would operate is that when a natural disaster occurs the team would mobilize three large cargo planes that would be filled with construction equipment, emergency medical supplies and food. When the team arrives at their destination they would unload and setup camp. They would then assist in any capacity that is required of them and they are equipped to handle. The initial capital expense for such a project would be very high. But the potential public relations benefits that would result are immeasurable. Another plan that could improve Coke’s market position over the next three years is if they were to reorganize their global management structure.

Coke’s large size can be a burden when they are attempting to sell products to many very different demographics of individuals. If the company’s bulk was divided by regions empowered to make major market and production decisions without the consent of the corporate headquarters. This would push each region to be more aggressive in their attempt to manage their regions. Dr. Zivic covers global management in detail in the book Management.

Coke needs to realize that the face of their market is bound to change. They need to make absolutely sure that their management matches their market. References www.coke.com (1998). The Coca-Cola company website. Ivester, M. Douglas.

(1998). Gillette company annual Report. Zivic, Louis.(1998). Management, Primus publishing. www.cnn.com (1999) Coke faces problems in Belgium.


I'm Lydia!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out