You know how most NAS devices come with Atom processors and have a hard time indexing or dealing with large data dumps, (I am talking about synology in this case), I was wondering is it possible to lend the desktop idle CPU power to the NAS to improve it's operations?     For example, it has been a few days and the indexer is still running. Is there anyway to do this on the PC?   I know that typically you could run a software specifically designed for doing that, like an indexer running on the desktop and updating the NAS or some other way.  /edit: deleted the general purpose thought
I have two desktops (one of which I'm using as a server), my main machine has a weaker i5 cpu, my server has a stronger i7 cpu. On my main machine I am experiencing stutters because the CPU often runs at full load under regular use (strangely, I also use upwards of 10GB of RAM, no joke... The heaviest program I'm running is google chrome).  I was wondering if there was any possible way to share a cpu from one machine over network to another machine as an emulated processor, which could be used by the client machine in a similar sort of fashion as virtual machines use or "borrow" their host's cpu.  This way I could offload work onto the server's cpu when the main cpu is under full load to prevent annoyances like stutter, and possibly combine both of them for more intense tasks (like decryption, compilation, archiving or other multithreaded stuff)  Does this sort of software exist, or has anyone at least tried to make it? If not, is it feasible?  (This sort of program would also ideally be able to offload data onto the server's RAM for faster processing, since the now common gigabit connections get to have nearly the same speeds as a standard HDD this doesn't sound far fetched either)  To reiterate, what I am primarily looking for is the ability to offload work from a system's main cpu when it is under too much load and forwarding it to another computer's cpu over network.
How can I create an Excel spreadsheet with C# without requiring Excel to be installed on the machine that's running the code? Built-in unit strings recognized by Quantity? My understanding is that heat is essentially atomic vibrations. If there are almost no atoms, how can there be residual heat?  Also, as I understand in space there is no heat transfer via convection and it is mainly through EM radiation. In this case, why is it that if i were to go into space with no suit and just an airtight helmet through which I could breathe, I would still freeze to death very quickly? I am going through Shankar's Principles of Quantum Mechanics and am having trouble finding the free particle propagator $U(t)$ that satisfies $$\lvert\psi (t)\rangle = U(t)\lvert\psi (0)\rangle$$ due to the degeneracy of the $E$ eigenkets. Shankar says that if the Hamiltonian has degenerate eigenvalues, we change the propagator equation from $$U(t) = \sum_{E} \lvert E\rangle\langle E\rvert e^{-iEt/{\hbar}}\tag{4.3.13}$$ to $$U(t) = \sum_{E} \sum_\alpha \lvert E, \alpha\rangle\langle E, \alpha\rvert e^{-iEt/\hbar} $$ where $\lvert E, \alpha \rangle $ are the orthonormal eigenkets for the $E$ eigenspace. This makes sense to me, because it seems like whenever we deal with degeneracy to use a projection. He also says for a Hamiltonian with no degeneracy to change the sum into an integral, so I imagine that for a Hamiltonian with a continuous, degenerate spectrum we would have this propagator: $$ U(t) = \sum_\alpha\int_\Re dE\lvert E, \alpha\rangle\langle E, \alpha\rvert e^{-iEt/\hbar}$$  I tried applying this to the free particle and had some trouble. In the book, after solving for the eigenkets and eigenvalues, $\lvert E\rangle = \lvert p\rangle$ and $p = \pm\sqrt{2mE}$, he chooses the propagator as a function of the momentum eigenvalues $p$ so that $$U(t) = \int_\Re dp\lvert p\rangle\langle p\rvert \exp(-ip^2t/2m).\tag{5.1.9}$$ I understand how he got to this, but I'm having some trouble because this doesn't appear to be the same expression that I have above. Splitting the integral up, we have $$U(t) = \int_{-\infty}^0dp\lvert p\rangle\langle p\rvert \exp(-ip^2t/2m) + \int_0^\infty dp\lvert p\rangle\langle p\rvert \exp(-ip^2t/2m)$$ The left integral can changed to an integral over $-p$, and the bounds switch from $0$ to $\infty$ such that: $$U(t) =  \int_{0}^\infty d(-p)\lvert -p\rangle\langle -p\rvert \exp(-ip^2t/2m) + \int_0^\infty dp\lvert p\rangle\langle p\rvert \exp(-ip^2t/2m)$$ Now we can substitute and interchange $\lvert p\rangle = \lvert E, + \rangle$,  $\lvert -p\rangle = \lvert E, - \rangle$, $E = p^2/2m$, and $dp = \pm mdE/\sqrt{2mE}$ to get: $$U(t) = \sum_{\alpha = \pm} \int_0^\infty dEm/\sqrt{2mE}\lvert E, \alpha\rangle\langle E, \alpha\rvert e^{-iEt/\hbar}. $$ This is the result that we are asked to prove in Exercise 5.1.1. Why is this not the same as the first expression for the propagator? Where did the extra $ m/\sqrt{2mE} $ come from? Am I just wrong in assuming that that is the general expression for a Hamiltonian with continuous and degenerate eigenvalues? Custom pagebreak in align equation How to obtain inverse behavior for `tail` and `head`? Is there a way to head/tail a document and get the reverse output; because you don't know how many lines there are in a document?  I.e. I just want to get everything but the first 2 lines of foo.txt to append to another document. Why am I not burned by a strong wind? finding $\int_0^\infty \dfrac{dx}{1+x^4}$ through complex analysis In GMAIL you can list all your boss-tell-off and wife-cuss-out emails by clicking Drafts    I'd like to see my started-but-never-finished responses, possibly between x Answers and y Votes in /&lt;&lt;user&gt;&gt;/Stats/? What if I run a virus/trojan Windows EXE on Ubuntu with Wine? Latexmk can't see a dependency on a .fmt format file When using unicode-math, how do I get the original calligraphic alphabet back? I am happy with the great majority of what unicode-math does. But at times I find that I prefer a symbol the way it was before. With \varnothing and \complement, for example. In those cases I was able to save them under a different name before loading unicode-math, but this doesn't always work.  Right now I'm trying to access the \mathcal alphabet from plain LaTeX. How might I accomplish this?    Additional Question  I've been looking through unicode-math, trying to figure out where exactly the original \mathcal alphabet gets discarded, but I eventually gave up.  It would be interesting if someone could explain:   how/where the original \mathcal font is defined anyway, and what kind of 'switch' is thrown by unicode-math that makes it unavailable. Java Thread priority has no effect /ə/ in a stressed syllable? According to , the schwa /ə/ doesn't occur in stressed syllables. But , Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary and Longman Pronunciation Dictionary say otherwise: the word "because" has been variously transcribed as /bɪˈkəz/ or /bəˈkəz/. So in which source should I believe? Or is there any error in transcription going on here? Or is "because" the only exception? And are there others? Calculating frames per second in a game In the book , at page 27 we find the exercise asserting that       Exercise I.XXXVI.   The underlying space of a zero-dimensional scheme is discrete; if the scheme is Noetherian, it is finite.     Thoughts I thought that a zero-dimensional scheme is one such that, in every local ring $\mathscr O_{X,p}$, the only prime ideal is its unique maximal ideal $\mathfrak m_{X,p}.$ Hence, supposing that $X=\operatorname{Spec} R$ is affine, we deduce that every prime ideal is maximal, so each ponit in $X$ is closed. But how does this imply the discreteness? It only implies the Hausdorff-ness of $X$, right? Furthermore, I cannot perceive what the "Noetherianity" has to do with the finiteness claimed here. In the affine case, it seems to be claiming that there are only a finite number of prime ideals in a Noetherian ring, if its scheme is zero-dimensional? For example, $\mathbb Z$ is a Dedekind domain, hence its scheme is zero-dimensional, but it has infinitely many primes: does this contradict the statement?    Thanks in advance for any reference or hint, and point out any inappropriate point if any is presented. Edit I see why my example cannot work now: it is one-dimensinoal: don't forget the pirme $(0)$. But I am still wondering why the statement is true... Why does my shell script choke on whitespace or other special characters? Determine if Term has Grandparent/Great-Grandparent Compute the mean of $(1 + X)^{-1}$ where $X$ is Poisson$(\lambda)$ Question  Let $X$ be Poisson with parameter $\lambda$.  Compute the mean of $(1 + X)^{-1}$. (Introduction to Probability Theory, Hoel, pp. 104)  Answer Key  The answer key shows that the mean is $\lambda^{-1}(1 - e^{-\lambda})$  My Solution  $$E(1 + X)^{-1} = \sum\limits_{j = 1}^\infty (1 + j)^{-1} \dfrac{\lambda^{(1 + j)^{-1}}e^{-\lambda}}{(1 + j)^{-1}!}$$ $$= e^{-\lambda} \sum\limits_{j = 1}^\infty \dfrac{\lambda^{(1 + j)^{-1}}}{((1 + j)^{-1} - 1)!}$$ $$= \lambda^{-1} e^{-\lambda} \sum\limits_{j = 1}^\infty \dfrac{\lambda^{(1 + j)^{-1} - 1}}{((1 + j)^{-1} - 1)!}$$ $$= \lambda^{-1} e^{-\lambda}(e^{\lambda} - 1)$$ $$= \lambda^{-1}(1 - e^{-\lambda})$$  EDIT: I found why I got the answer incorrect.  Thanks for those who answer the question! :) Using Moq to determine if a method is called It is my understanding that I can test that a method call will occur if I call a higher level method, i.e.:  public abstract class SomeClass() {         public void SomeMehod()     {         SomeOtherMethod();     }      internal abstract void SomeOtherMethod(); }   I want to test that if I call SomeMethod() then I expect that SomeOtherMethod() will be called.   Am I right in thinking this sort of test is available in a mocking framework?