How to get book cover picture through amazon API I want to get the cover of a book form its ASIN through Amazon API. I use the ItemLookup function, but I only get the author, manufacturer and the title.  ie :  &lt;ItemAttributes&gt; &lt;Author&gt;Anna Gavalda&lt;/Author&gt; &lt;Manufacturer&gt;J'Ai Lu&lt;/Manufacturer&gt; &lt;ProductGroup&gt;Book&lt;/ProductGroup&gt; &lt;Title&gt;Ensemble, C'Est Tout (French Edition)&lt;/Title&gt; &lt;/ItemAttributes&gt;
How do I get a book graphic and description from the Amazon Book API? sends an ISBN number to Amazon and gets back a small bit of XML including author, title, and publisher.  However, I also want to get small, medium and large graphic and book descriptions of the title.  Problem: I can find no REST URL examples/documention that work, either at Google or when logged into my "AWS Account" at Amazon Associates.  I find a lot of examples from 2003-2005 but they are all out-of-date and give errors, it seems that Amazon's cloud web services have obfuscated their simple REST API documentation for their books.  Can anyone point me to some documentation on how I can get detailed information about books at Amazon via REST/XML?   Here's what I have tried so .
How do moving charges produce magnetic fields? I'm tutoring high school students. I've always taught them that:     A charged particle moving without acceleration produces an electric as well as a magnetic field.   It produces an electric field because it's a charge particle. But when it is at rest, it doesn't produce a magnetic field. All of a sudden when it starts moving, it starts producing a magnetic field. Why? What happens to it when it starts moving? What makes it produce a magnetic field when it starts moving? How can I upgrade from Mac OS X Tiger 10.4? If I buy a regular retail Snow Leopard disc (i.e. the £25 version), can I use it to upgrade a Mac from Tiger (10.4)?   on the Apple Store’s Q&amp;A site suggests it’ll work, but Apple seem to imply that you need the (significantly more expensive) Mac Box Set (“”). Electrodynamics textbooks that emphasize applications Please recommend undergraduate-level textbooks on electrodynamics which emphasize practical applications and real life examples. Please describe the book's level and contents and its intended audience in as much detail as possible.   Please provide both applications from everyday life for curious students as well as engineering applications from a physics perspective. I have not used Evolution for long time now and I would like to reset all the settings and start from scratch. How would I be able to do this? If an opponent casts  to gain control of  then sacrifices it who will draw the card? This is problem 31b) from Dummit and Foote chapter 14.2. I am looking for a hint on how to attack the problem, since I have been thinking about it for a couple of hours but I don't even know where to start. The problem says:  Let $K$ be a finite extension of $F$ of degree $n$. Let $\alpha$ be an element of $K$. Prove that the minimal polynomial for $\alpha$ over $F$ is the same as the minimal polynomial for the linear transformation $T_{\alpha}$. In this problem, $T_{\alpha}$ is an $F$-linear transformation of $K$ that arises from $\alpha$ acting by left multiplication on $K$.  I appreciate any helpful suggestions on how to start attacking the problem or any possible hint. Thanks! How does evolving relate to CP? The topological space $X=\omega_1\cup \{\omega_1\}$ is not first countable but $\omega_1$ is. Here $\omega_1$ denotes the set of all countable ordinals and $\{\omega_1\}$ is the first uncountable ordinal. Cardinality of $\omega_1$ is $\aleph_1.$And also $\omega_1$ is called the limit ordinal meaning it is the limit point of the set $\omega_1.$  Here I want to prove two things. $1)$ $\omega_1$ is first countable. and $2)$ $\{\omega_1\}$ is the limit point of $\omega_1$. But since no sequence converges to $\{\omega_1\}$, using this I could say that our space $X$ is not first countable.  $1)$ The proof of this I got from  with just one question: it says we need to prove that such an $S(y)$ exists,and I'm thinking $S(y)=\cap\{u\in \omega_1:u\gt y\}.$ This is correct$?$ But here is a chance that the countable base around $y$ may be finite and not countably infinite.  $2)$ If possible let us assume that $\omega_1$ is not a limit point of the set $\omega_1.$ $U$ be a nbd of $\omega_1$ that does not intersect $\omega_1.$ Then what are the elements of $U$ like? The ones coming before $\omega_1$  cannot be uncountable because $\omega_1$  is the first. Then they must be countable. This is absurd so no such $U$ exists. Thus $\{\omega_1\}$ is a limit point.  Are my proofs correct? Thank you. What is known about $\mathcal C^\infty$ functions $\mathbb R\to\mathbb R$ that always take rationals to rationals? Are they all quotients of polynomials? If not, are there any that are bounded yet don't tend to a limit for $x\to +\infty$? If there are, then can we also require them to be analytic?  (This is basically just a random musing after I found myself using trigonometric functions twice in unrelated throwaway counterexamples. It struck me that it was kind of conceptual overkill to whip out a transcendental function for the purpose I needed: basically that it had to keep wiggling forever. I couldn't think of a nice non-trancendental function to do this job, however, and now wonder whether that is because they can't exist). HA configuration for KVM machines installed on shared iSCSI storage My requirement is to provide HA to a Zimbra Server. We want Zimbra files to be installed in a Netapp SAN which is providing around 5.7 TB as a SAN iSCI Drive. Since Netapp comes in with Dual Controller and stable performance, we are unlikely to have any down time.  I have 2 servers each having Xeon processor 6 Core, 32 GB RAM and 2 x 250 GB SSD. These are the two servers where I have installed CentOS 7.6. We would like to have one as primary and the second one as secondary.   Idea is to use the same principle of KVM HA ( What Redhat and even VMware) provides, so that if the primay goes down the IP gets switched to secondary, to create a simple Hot Redudant system.  We have a very few users on Zimbra, but there are a lot of automated emails coming in and we require a very large storage, and hence we are using the Netapp box.  I am able to switch between the KVMs. However I am struggling to figure out how I need to mount the iSCI target, so that the mail application stays alive.  Zimbra typically installs on /opt/. Do I mount the target on /opt/, and if so will it work? Or am I missing something else?  Or should I run the VM of the shared storage itself, and if so how can I configure it.   Zimbra itself is a combination of a database and files, and uses a number of services to keep itself active. Idea of using a shared storage is for Redundancy and high availability.  Appreciate your response and support. How to align content of a div to the bottom Change .jpg quality of terminal screenshots The achievements drop-down menu in the new top bar shows me when a question/answer earns me reputation and how much, and that's great, but I don't know what caused that to happen. I'd like to know why I received reputation: was it an upvote? An accepted answer? An accepted edit? If I have the list of reputation values in my head I can figure it out, but it would help me to see it somewhere in the drop-down, even as title text on hover.    Edit:  It sounds like the items in the menu can roll up multiple events, and that's why it doesn't show the event there. How about adding a link to my reputation tab to the menu so I can quickly get to a breakdown? Rename profile folder on Windows 7/8 Constructing the reciprocal of a segment How can one construct the reciprocal length of a line segment? For example, given any line segment a, how can $\frac{1}{a}$ be constructed?  I was told that it can be solved by creating similar triangles, but I do not get it. I'm looking for an idiom or saying that I could use when people are focusing too much on small details and not seeing the big picture.  A couple that come to mind are "being penny-wise and pound foolish" and "rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic". However, the former doesn't fit what I'm thinking of because the present activity might not be wise. The latter implies too much about impending doom.  For example, let's say some company is spending all their time refining a small detail in their product, while ignoring a major opportunity shift in the industry. What phrase could I use there? I noticed an unexpected different line spacing of the titlepage what drives me crazy. The left page is the MWE, the right page without the \\ in front of Name.  \documentclass{scrartcl}  \begin{document}  \centering \Huge \textbf{UUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUUU} \vspace{\baselineskip}\\ \textbf{UUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUUU UUUUUUUUUUUUU} {\rmfamily\Large \vspace{5\baselineskip}\\Name}  \end{document}     Any idea what causes this? Thanks alot!  Cheers, Stephan What is the difference between N and N-1 in calculating population variance? I did not get the why there are N and N-1 while calculating population variance. When we use N and when we use N-1?      It says that when population is very big there is no difference between N and N-1 but it does not tell why is there N-1 at the beginning.  Edit: Please don't confuse with n and n-1 which are used in estimating.  Edit2: I'm not talking about population estimation. I recently saw a lecturer prove the following theorem (assuming the result that every analytic function is locally 1-1 whenever its derivative is nonzero): Let $\Omega \subset \mathbb{C}$ be open, and let $f : \Omega \to \mathbb{C}$ be 1-1 and analytic on $\Omega$.  Then $f&#39;(z_0) \not = 0$ for every $z_0 \in \Omega$.  I got the basic idea behind the proof: we assume for contradiction that $f&#39;(z_0) = 0$, and, assuming without loss of generality that $z_0 = f(z_0) =0$, we have (from the power-series expansion) that $f(z) = z^kg(z)$ for some analytic $g$ in some disk at the origin (i.e., $z_0$) and some $k \ge 2$. Since $z^k$ is not 1-1 in any such disk (because there are multiple roots of unity), then $f$ isn't either.  However, the proof he gave was rather awkward and technical- it involved defining three different axillary functions, even though the idea was simple, and I've since forgotten how it exactly worked.  In any case, I'm convinced there's a better way.  The problem is that I'm having trouble turning the idea into a real proof- I know that it obviously follows if $g$ is 1-1, but I'm also pretty sure that that is too strong an assumption.  Am I missing something, or does the argument just have to be more complicated? What is the difference between therapy and treatment?