Whenever we see a close up of a zombie's face, their eyes always appear to be a , which would lead me to believe they are blind.  And, I'm assuming, they don't produce tears, so their eyes should be damaged beyond use anyway. But it seems as if they can see reasonably well, at least well enough to distinguish a person from something else.   They probably use sound and smell to track targets, but I've seen episodes where they are distracted by flares or fires, so they have to be able to see well enough to spot a fire in the distance.  This question :  addresses a zombie's senses and if they diminish over time. I would be more interested in older zombies, as their eyes should really be damaged beyond any use.  Is their eyesight ever addressed or explained in the show or in the comics?
Based on  I started thinking about whether or not a Walker's senses will diminish over time.  We know that they at least have a sense of sight, hearing and smell, as evidenced S5E01 (and many others besides).  What we do not know is how old those Walkers were.  Is there any information that I missed in the show, or from other canon, to indicate whether or not a Walker ever loses any of these senses?
A more specific question about a tricky redirect case Method defined as testMethod do not support web service callouts, test skipped Can you transfer a Windows 7 XP-mode VHD to a new PC without the need for reactivation? At the moment I am running Vista 32 bit and use VPC 2007 a lot. I have several Windows 2000 Virtual Machines set up with complex software configurations. For me, one of the advantages of working with VPCs is that a Virtual Machine can easily be copied to another PC (like a notebook). Also, when I move to a new PC, I can immediately work with my existing Virtual Machines without the need to reinstall all applications.   I am thinking about buying a new pc with Windows 7 64 bit pro, and using the XP-Mode Virtual Machine that comes with Windows 7. The advantages would be support for more memory (so being able to run more Virtual Machines simultaneously) and having a licenced XP Virtual Machine.  I would like to know if you can transfer a VHD that is based on the XP-mode VHD to another machine without Activation issues. The other machine will of course, also be running Windows 7. I would guess that this would not be a problem.   However, I did read about a guy who had to reinstall his Windows 7 because of a harddisk failure, and could not access his XP-mode VHD anymore because it demanded re-activation.  So can you transfer a Windows 7 XP-mode VHD to a new PC without the need for reactivation? Cartoon with a young unicorn and a demon Synaptics driver doesn't load sometimes Why do we call a 1/2 spin particle satisfying the Dirac equation a , and not a  or a ? How do I change a switched outlet to a half-hot outlet? I am trying to change a switched outlet to a half-hot outlet. If you can see the picture, the outlet currently only has a white, black, and ground wire coming to it.   The switch is on the other side of the wall and it would be eextremely difficult and ugly to run another wire to it. (no crawl or attic space). So my question is, can I change the current outlet/wiring within the outlet to make it a half-hot? My understanding is that removing the brass connector will just make half of it dead. Im asked to prove that a polynomial of an odd degree has a root. Im going to use IVT to prove this, but I'm wondering if I can use the assumption that an odd degree polynomial has either two cases:  $$ \lim_{x\to\infty}h(x)=+\infty \\ \lim_{x\to-\infty}h(x)=-\infty \\ $$ $$and$$ $$ \lim_{x\to\infty}h(x)=-\infty \\ \lim_{x\to-\infty}h(x)=+\infty \\ $$ Then by this there exists numbers $a,b$ such that $$ h(a)&lt;0&lt;h(b) $$ $$or$$ $$ h(b)&lt;0&lt;h(a) $$ Which I think would prove that odd degreed $h(x)$ has at least a root. Or is there a more convincing way to show that there are numbers in $h(X)$ greater than zero and less than zero?  edit: (sorry about the bad limit notation) How to create a squiggle arrow with some text on it in TikZ? I need to define a new command to create a squiggle arrow with some text on it. Something similar to what \xrightarrow command produces but with wiggly arrows as in \rightsquigarrow. The length of the arrow should automatically be adjusted to fit the text above it and I do not know how to handle this part in TikZ. Any ideas would be much appreciated. Particularly, what is the best snippets package out there?  Features:   easy to define new snippets (plain text, custom input with defaults) simple navigation between predefined positions in the snippet multiple insertion of the same custom input accepts currently selected text as a custom input cross-platform (Windows, Linux) dynamically evaluated expressions (embedded code) written in a concise programming language (Perl, Python, Ruby are preferred) nicely coexists with others packages in Emacs   Example of code template, a simple for loop in C:  for (int i = 0; i &lt; %N%; ++i) {   _ }   It is a lot of typing for such common code. I want to invoke a code template or snippet which inserts that boilerplate code for me. Additionally it stops (on TAB or other keystroke) at %N% (my input replaces it) and final position of the cursor is _. \overbrace and \underbrace with square bracket If $e^{itx_n}$ converges for every $t\in\mathbb R$, then does $x_n$ converge? Grammatically, what is "It" in the following sentence? I'm currently working at a private academy in Korea, and my boss just asked me a real head-scratcher.   In the sentence:     It doesn't have to be hot and humid for players to lose too much water from their bodies.    I'm aware that "It" is a subject pronoun replacing "The weather." Besides that, however, I'm unsure.   Is it a false subject? I wouldn't think so since it's a pronoun. Is it some crazy kind of indirect object?  Anyway, thank you all for your help! Is there a way to load my own custom CSS or Javascript while using a browser?  When I'm accessing a website or developing a website I want to load my own custom scripts from my computer. I know this can be done by Firebug or Chrome's developer toolbar, but after you refresh your browser your changes will be cleared too. This is exactly what I'm looking for adding CSS and Javascript, but I wish it has an option where you temporarily save your changes locally. Or it has an option to load external CSS or JS files.   Purpose:   When I'm developing the frontend, sometimes it's convenient for me using Chrome's developer toolbar or Firefox's Firebug to change or tweak CSS properties because I can then see the changes in real time without refreshing. One problem I see is that every time I refresh my browser, my changes also get reset. Now I wish there were an option where I could save my changes locally or load my own external .css file or .js file. I want to customize how some websites look when viewed locally, e.g., accessing a blog that has too many ads. I want to apply CSS properties to hide the junk.   Browsers I use often:   Google Chrome (for development: Built-in Dev Toolbar) Mozilla Firefox (for development: Firebug) Why does the product topology allow proper subsets for only finitely many elements? What are character special and block special files in a unix system? From the  on the dual of a norm:  $X$ and $Y$ are normed spaces, and we associate with each $f\in L(X,Y)$ (the space of bounded linear operators from $X$ to $Y$) the number $$\|f\| = \sup\{|f(x)|:x\in X, \|x\| \leq 1\}.$$  At some point in the proof that $L(X,Y)$ is bounded, it seems like they use the inequality $$\|fx\| \leq \|f\|\cdot\|x\|,$$ where $\|x\|\leq 1$.  I can't see why this should holds.   $\|f|\|$ is the supremum of what $|f(x)|$ can be, given that $\|x\|\leq 1$. So, given that $\|x\| \leq 1$, $|fx|$ should be bounded by $\|f\|$. But why should it be bounded by $\|f\|\cdot\|x\|$? Does Windows 7 allow auto-login with a stored password, like TweakUI did? The TweakUI powertoy for Windows XP had an option to auto-login. It stored your password and did the login for you. This was useful, since you kept password protection, but had login programs loaded when you first booted.  When you switched users or hibernated, it would still ask for a password, which is the desired behavior.  Is there a way of doing this in Windows 7? Why is it usually "friend of his", but no possessive apostrophe with "friend of Peter"? As  shows, we nearly always use the possessive form of personal pronouns for friend of mine/his/ours/etc.  But when it comes to actual names, we prefer  without the possessive apostrophe. That preference is even more marked with, say, . Not that I think the usage itself is particularly American - it's much the same with .  Personally, I find friend of him grates. In general I've no strong feelings either way as to whether it's friend of Peter or friend of Peter's (though I deplore the possessive in ), but in line with many others, I really don't like the possessive in relation to things like countries.  Why is this?   Edit: Noting an apparent "progression" (pronoun -> person -> nation) marked by reduction in use of the possessive, I checked at a finer "granularity". NGram shows that although it does occur,  virtually "flatlines" against friend of mine. But the bias reduces through of you, of us, and by the time I get to  it's much less extreme. There seems to be something "egocentric" about the double possessive.  Presumably when babies learn to speak, they soon notice that possessive pronouns, possessive apostrophes, and the word "of", all do the same job. Parents would correct a child who says "of mine's", but probably wouldn't even notice the same "redundancy" in "of Peter's". Younger speakers are unlikely to even be talking about something "of America's". Perhaps as we mature we tend to discard the "double possessive" for the more "distant" things that only adults are likely talk about, but we keep it for "closer" people because that's how we spoke when we were younger.  EDIT2 I note that I'm a great fan of him is vanishingly rare compared to ...fan of his, but with ...fan (of John) the double possessive occurs far less often than ...friend (of John's). Usage seems to be affected by the noun before "of" as well as the one after it. This is getting complicated... \section*[toc]{normal section title} not working for me for my thesis I want to have a section appear differently in the ToC than in the text.  After googling a bit, I found \section[short]{long} as a proposed answer, but this does not seem to work for me.  Here is a MnotWE:  \documentclass[12pt,a4paper,reqno]{amsbook} \usepackage{fontspec} \setmainfont[SlantedFont={Latin Modern Roman Slanted},          SmallCapsFont = {Latin Modern Roman Caps},          ]{Latin Modern Roman}    \usepackage[activate=true,nocompatibility},final,tracking=true,factor=1100,stretch=10,shrink=10]{microtype}  \usepackage[bindingoffset=1cm]{geometry} \usepackage{polyglossia} \setdefaultlanguage{english} \usepackage{csquotes}  \title{\textsc{Some Title}} \author{me}  \begin{document} \maketitle \frontmatter \tableofcontents \mainmatter  \part[toc part]{normal part} \section*[toc section]{normal section} some text  \end{document}   It just takes "toc part" as normal and as ToC heading for the \part command.  For the section I am interested in the starred version. Here the [toc section] part of the command seems to be completely ignored.  I use LuaLaTeX to build my document. Does anyone have a suggestion how to get a \section* appear with a different title in the ToC?