instruction:
Answer the question from the given passage. Your answer should be directly extracted from the passage, and it should be a single entity, name, or number, not a sentence.
question:
Passage: In the laboratory, stratigraphers analyze samples of stratigraphic sections that can be returned from the field, such as those from drill cores. Stratigraphers also analyze data from geophysical surveys that show the locations of stratigraphic units in the subsurface. Geophysical data and well logs can be combined to produce a better view of the subsurface, and stratigraphers often use computer programs to do this in three dimensions. Stratigraphers can then use these data to reconstruct ancient processes occurring on the surface of the Earth, interpret past environments, and locate areas for water, coal, and hydrocarbon extraction. Question: What type of surveys show the location of stratigraphic units in the subsurface?
answer:
geophysical


question:
Passage: Luther's hymns were frequently evoked by particular events in his life and the unfolding Reformation. This behavior started with his learning of the execution of Johann Esch and Heinrich Voes, the first individuals to be martyred by the Roman Catholic Church for Lutheran views, prompting Luther to write the hymn 'Ein neues Lied wir heben an' ('A new song we raise'), which is generally known in English by John C. Messenger's translation by the title and first line 'Flung to the Heedless Winds' and sung to the tune Ibstone composed in 1875 by Maria C. Tiddeman. Question: What caused Luther to write hymns?
answer:
events in his life


question:
Passage: Since its founding, the EU has operated among an increasing plurality of national and globalising legal systems. This has meant both the European Court of Justice and the highest national courts have had to develop principles to resolve conflicts of laws between different systems. Within the EU itself, the Court of Justice's view is that if EU law conflicts with a provision of national law, then EU law has primacy. In the first major case in 1964, Costa v ENEL, a Milanese lawyer, and former shareholder of an energy company, named Mr Costa refused to pay his electricity bill to Enel, as a protest against the nationalisation of the Italian energy corporations. He claimed the Italian nationalisation law conflicted with the Treaty of Rome, and requested a reference be made to both the Italian Constitutional Court and the Court of Justice under TFEU article 267. The Italian Constitutional Court gave an opinion that because the nationalisation law was from 1962, and the treaty was in force from 1958, Costa had no claim. By contrast, the Court of Justice held that ultimately the Treaty of Rome in no way prevented energy nationalisation, and in any case under the Treaty provisions only the Commission could have brought a claim, not Mr Costa. However, in principle, Mr Costa was entitled to plead that the Treaty conflicted with national law, and the court would have a duty to consider his claim to make a reference if there would be no appeal against its decision. The Court of Justice, repeating its view in Van Gend en Loos, said member states 'albeit within limited spheres, have restricted their sovereign rights and created a body of law applicable both to their nationals and to themselves' on the 'basis of reciprocity'. EU law would not 'be overridden by domestic legal provisions, however framed... without the legal basis of the community itself being called into question.' This meant any 'subsequent unilateral act' of the member state inapplicable. Similarly, in Amministrazione delle Finanze v Simmenthal SpA, a company, Simmenthal SpA, claimed that a public health inspection fee under an Italian law of 1970 for importing beef from France to Italy was contrary to two Regulations from 1964 and 1968. In 'accordance with the principle of the precedence of Community law,' said the Court of Justice, the 'directly applicable measures of the institutions' (such as the Regulations in the case) 'render automatically inapplicable any conflicting provision of current national law'. This was necessary to prevent a 'corresponding denial' of Treaty 'obligations undertaken unconditionally and irrevocably by member states', that could 'imperil the very foundations of the' EU. But despite the views of the Court of Justice, the national courts of member states have not accepted the same analysis. Question: What were the years two Regulations that conflicted with an Italian law originate in the Simmenthal SpA case?
answer:

1964 and 1968


