What do Pi's faith and his religious practices add to the story of this young man with his ability to survive? How does this create a life story with a happy ending?

Pi is an Indian boy (a Hindu majority country) immigrating to Canada (a Christian majority country) who declares that he is not only Hindu (the religion into which he was born) but also Catholic and Muslim. Religion is an important theme in Yann Martel's Life of Pi—indeed the narrator tells us that this tale is one that would make one "believe in God." However, in the case of Pi, "gods" might be more appropriate. The book makes references throughout to the Bible, the Quran, and even Kabbalah. Even the name of the ship, Tsimtsum, is a Hebrew word, which refers to God's contraction into himself in order to make room for the unfolding of the physical universe. Pi's wreck can also be read as allusive to the tale of Noah's ark. The devastating loss that Pi suffers and his 227-day isolation on the raft causes him to seek answers to deep existential questions, and he finds that the different religions in which he has faith provide him those answers. His belief is central to his ability to survive. One might say that Pascal's wager is key to understanding Pi's faith. This is what the early modern French philosopher Blaise Pascal says:

Whether God exists or not, we should believe in Him, for we suffer nothing by our wrong belief if He does not exist, while we gain an infinitude for our faith if He does.

Pi believes in the gods of three different religions, and he seems to be in agreement with Pascal about the "infinitude" to be gained from belief. His religious beliefs imply that he is not dogmatic about religion, and he finds that faith in a higher power lends meaning to our lives.

In return for Beowulf's bravery, what did King Hrothgar give to Beowulf and to his men?

Beowulf sets off to kill the monster Grendel, which he does, along with tearing off his entire arm and shoulder. He brings the arm back to Hrothgar, who rewards him with a golden banner, coat of mail, and sword, which he caps off with eight magnificent horses with jeweled saddles and golden bridles. He also gives gold and other treasures to Beowulf's men. After Beowulf kills Grendel’s mother, he brings the hilt of the magical jeweled sword and bestows them on Hrothgar. By reading the hilt, Hrothgar learns the owner’s name and that the giant makers experienced a devastating war and floods. Following some cautionary advice, Hrothgar first rewards Beowulf with a lavish feast. The next morning, Unferth arrives and presents Beowulf with the gift of his prize sword Hrunting, which had formerly been just a loan.

Characterize snowball as a leader in Animal Farm. Do you think his reaction to the stable-boys death is the appropriate reaction to have during a revolution?

During the Animalist uprising, the big old shire horse Boxer accidentally kills a stable-boy. Boxer feels somewhat guilty about this, but Snowball tells him not fret over it as the only good human is a dead human. This incident, and Snowball's reaction to it, shows us his ruthless side. Like the fanatical ideologue he is, Snowball believes that the end justifies the means. If some individuals get hurt or even killed in the course of a revolution, then that's just too bad. So long as the revolution is successfully carried out, that's all that matters.
Snowball is supposed to represent Leon Trotsky, one of the leaders of the Russian Revolution. Like Snowball, he too believed that the end justified the means. Though often presented as a more moderate figure than his co-revolutionists Lenin and Stalin, Trotsky was in a actual fact no less ruthless, and was every bit as prepared to countenance death, violence, and bloodshed as a means of attaining and consolidating Bolshevik power.
As to the appropriateness of Snowball's seemingly callous actions, there are two ways of looking at the question. From a moral standpoint, his remarks to Boxer are completely unacceptable. There is simply no justification whatsoever for the taking of an innocent life, be it human or animal.
From a revolutionary standpoint, however, Snowball and others like him would argue that such deaths are a necessary, unavoidable part of any violent uprising, and are in any case a small price to pay for the ultimate victory of the revolution. Which standpoint we choose to adopt depends largely on whether or not we are political revolutionaries.

What is meant by the Puritans's theocracy?

A theocracy is a form of government in which priests of one religion or another rule in the name of God. Colonial Massachusetts is traditionally regarded as a Puritan theocracy because the men in charge of the colony—and it was only men who were allowed to exercise any political authority there—did so according to their religious beliefs.
In Puritan Massachusetts, as with all theocracies, there was no distinction between the secular and the religious, no separation between church and state. All aspects of civic life in the colony were organized on the basis of the Puritans' rigid Calvinism.
In practice, this meant that the colony was governed by a council of elders, chosen for their superior godliness. Also, the role of minister in Puritan Massachusetts was an important one, which involved so much more than simply attending to the pastoral needs of the flock. Though the minister was selected by his congregation, he was paid—quite handsomely, as it happens—out of town government funds as he was in fact a public official.
All those involved in the administration of government were charged with the promotion of godliness; that indeed was the sole end of government as the Puritans understood it. The Puritans set down stringent laws which determined how people lived their lives; and there were severe punishments for anyone who broke those laws. Puritanical strictness ensured that people could find themselves being punished for a whole range of offenses, ranging from gambling to dancing, from swearing to breaking the sabbath. And if anyone were brave or foolish enough to challenge the theocratic system, the church government would use every coercive means at its disposal to crack down on the merest hint of dissent.
As those in charge of Massachusetts believed themselves to be doing God's work, they concluded that anyone who defied them was guilty of blasphemy, and therefore deserving of the most severe punishments. To challenge the church government was to challenge God himself.

If Wade truly wants to abandon humanity and live in solitude, how is that different from IOI's ideas for monetizing OASIS?

I'm assuming this question is about the different ways Wade and IOI perceive the OASIS. Wade views the OASIS as an escape from the horrors and disappointments of the real world, where he is an unattractive, unwanted orphan. In the OASIS, he is powerful and popular. However, the IOI want to make people have to pay for use of the OASIS, which up to this point has been mostly free.
Wade feels that to monetize the OASIS is to take away a significant source of comfort for most people of his generation. Wade feels their wanting to only allow OASIS access to a privileged minority is morally wrong and a great horror when the outside world is so terrible. So, the difference might be that Wade sees the OASIS as something essential that should continue to be available to everyone as passionate about geek culture as he is, while IOI only wants to make more money off of it.

What is the essential conflict in Wednesday Wars?

The essential conflict in The Wednesday Wars is one between expectation and experience.
This conflict can be seen throughout the novel. For example, Holling has an ambivalent relationship with his father. Yet, despite his father's obvious failings, Holling continues to hope for the best. Most of the time, however, Mr. Hoodhood disappoints Holling. A prime example of Mr. Hoodhood's disinterest in Holling can be seen in the Mickey Mantle episode.
Accordingly, after playing the part of Ariel in The Tempest, Holling rushes outside, where his father is supposed to be waiting. Mr. Hoodhood had promised to take Holling to Baker's Sporting Emporium to see Mickey Mantle. Despite his disappointment, Holling manages to act quickly. He flags down a bus and begs the driver to take him to the stadium.
For his part, the driver takes pity on Holling. When Holling gets to the stadium, however, more disappointment awaits him. Upon seeing Holling in Ariel's costume, Mickey Mantle refuses to sign an autograph for Holling. Meanwhile, Danny Hupfer returns his own autographed baseball to Mickey Mantle after witnessing the athlete's rude treatment of Holling. Both Danny and Holling learn that sometimes, expectation does not correspond with experience. It is a painful life lesson.
Another example of this conflict is when Mrs. Bigio (bereft of her soldier husband) lashes out at Mai Thi. For her part, Mai Thi has also suffered, but she is too stunned to respond to Mrs. Bigio's pain. For both, the expectations of hope have been crushed. Mai Thi is displaced from her home, while Mrs. Bigio's husband dies at the hands of the Viet Cong in Vietnam. For Mrs. Bigio's husband, there is no victory celebration or triumphant return home. Instead, the warrior intent upon removing the scourge of communism from Vietnam dies in a foreign land.
Meanwhile, for Mai Thi, there is little hope that she will be able to return to her country of origin in the near future. Her hopes for safety and security are dashed upon the altar of war.
So, again, there is the discrepancy between expectation and experience for the characters in the novel.

The main conflict is between Holling and Mrs. Baker. At first, Holling thinks that Mrs. Baker hates his guts. She comes across as quite a stern, forbidding character who always seems to be on his case. But the problem is that Holling doesn't really know Mrs. Baker at all, not the real Mrs. Baker, at any rate. He just sees her as an unbending authority figure.
But when they start reading Shakespeare together, things change. Holling sees a different side to Mrs. Baker and realizes that he's got her all wrong. Gradually, a bond of mutual respect and trust develops, which provides resolution to a conflict based on misunderstanding. In finally learning to accept Mrs. Baker for who and what she is, Holling's also overcome a conflict that most of us have to deal with at some point in our lives: the gap between what we perceive to be the truth and what's actually true.

What happens when copper is treated with dilute HCl?

Questions of this kind typically require you to identify the type of reaction that could potentially occur, then use published reference material on that type of reaction to determine whether the materials react or not.
When discussing chemical reactions it is almost always necessary to know the chemical reaction equation, or as much of it as possible. Thus we begin by writing down what we know. The symbol for copper is Cu, and it is a solid at room temperature, so we write Cu(s). The HCl is described as ”dilute,” implying a solution in water, so we label it aqueous, HCl(aq). We can write
Cu(s) + HCl(aq) -> ?
What reaction could potentially occur? Copper is a metal, and when metals are present in compounds, they are normally in the form of positive ions. Furthermore, they are paired with negative ions. There is only one negative ion in the equation that could potentially combine with a copper cation: chloride ion, Cl^- . You should know that when hydrochloric acid is dissolved in water, it is ionized, that is, exists as positive hydrogen ions and negative chloride ions.
Here you have an element, copper, and a compound, hydrochloric acid. The copper could combine with the chloride from the acid, forming an ionic compound, and leaving hydrogen by itself. Elemental hydrogen has the formula H_2 and is a gas. To summarize, an element and a compound would react to give a different element and compound. A potential (unbalanced) reaction would look like this:
Cu(s) + HCl(aq)-> Cu_?Cl(aq) + H_2(g)
I hope by now you have recognized the many features that identify this reaction as a Single Replacement: there are an element and a compound on each side, and the compound is dissolved in aqueous solution. To determine if a single replacement reaction will occur or not, we look at the activity series.
The activity series (link attached) is arranged so that elements higher in the series will replace elements lower in the series. If the compound contains the lower element, the higher element will react with it. Here we are looking for copper to be higher than hydrogen. If copper is higher, it will replace hydrogen from HCl, and a reaction will occur.
The activity series shows that copper is below hydrogen. Copper will not replace hydrogen in a compound. That means no reaction will occur between copper and dilute hydrochloric acid. Nothing will happen when these materials are put together! And we are spared having to figure out if copper would form copper(I) or copper(II) ions.