I'm currently using TexMaker and Biber on a Ubuntu machine. I'm quite happy with just using the standard numeric citation style, safe for 1 thing: it shortens all authors in my bibliography to "First author et al". I was wondering how to set it to list all authors with their full name? The answer is probably pretty straight forward, but I can't seem to find it.  \usepackage[backend=biber, style=numeric, sorting=none]{biblatex}  \newpage  \printbibliography
I'm using the  package to add citations and a bibliography to my LaTeX document. I've noticed that only the first author plus "et al." is displayed for works with more than three authors. That's fine with me for in-text-citations, but I'd rather have the complete author information in the bibliography. How can I do that?
Adding DC voltages of PSU I need to add two voltages together that share a common ground (power supply from computer). I tried using bridge rectifiers and Op-Amps. macOS High Sierra: Where is the Secure Empty Trash option? What could we call a person with deep knowledge in various fields? I am trying to show that how the binary expansion of a given positive integer is unique.  According to this link, , All I see is that I can recopy theorem 3-1's proof?  Is this polished enough of an argument. Thanks How to generate multiple maps where one highlighted attribute changes? I have a layer that contains counties within the state of Washington.    I need to build one map (jpg) for each county.  For that specific map all counties will show as light grey, but the specific county will be green, and the file name will be the county name. There are four options. Which of them is correct?- (a)${p\over k}$ (b)${k\over p}$ (c)$\log({p\over k})$ (d)${\log p\over k}$ I somehow want to use the rule for evaluating this kind of sum using integration, i.e. $\int_{0}^{1} f(x) \ dx=\lim_{n\to\infty} {1\over n}\sum_{r=1}^{n}f({r\over n})$  But the given expression $\lim_{n\to\infty} [{1\over kn}+{1\over k(n+1)}+{1\over k(n+2)}+\cdots+{1\over k(n+p-k)}]={1\over k}\lim_{n\to\infty}{1\over n}\sum_{r=0}^{p-k}\frac{1}{1+{r\over n}}$, sum running from $0$ to $p-k$ instead of $n$. So, how to evaluate this limit? Thanks for assistance in advance. How can I get free or trial ExactTarget instance Do paths in Adobe Photoshop have to be closed? I am working to convert a png to a vector graphic.  I am outlining the image using the pen tool.  Photoshop insists that the pen tool produce closed loops in order for me to use the "Stroke path..." tool.  Why is this? Can I disable pinch to show all open tabs in Safari? Make 15 lines / ticks with Photoshop, each of them rotated of 20° Make all footnotes numbered subsequently, but one with a symbol Is there an alternative to Cantor's cardinalities that makes proper subsets smaller than their sets? Cantor defined an infinite set as a set whose subset can be placed in a one-to-one correspondence with its subset. That is, take the set of all natural numbers: {0, 1, 2, 3, 4,...}. From that set, you can form a subset of all even numbers: {0, 2, 4, 6,...}. There is a one-to-one correspondence between both these sets. After all, you can multiply each member in the set of all natural numbers by 2, and you’ll get the set of all even numbers. Because of this one-to-one correspondence, the two sets have the same cardinality, despite the set of even numbers being a subset of the set of natural numbers. This is counter-intuitive to me. How can a subset of a set be as big as the set itself? To make the intuition more concrete, consider the set of multiples of 1,000,000: {0, 1,000,000, 2,000,000,...}. There is a one-to-one correspondence between this set and the set of all natural numbers. So they have the same cardinality. This is really counter-intuitive.  From as far as I can tell, there are basically two axioms at play here:  A1: If all members of set A can be placed in a one-to-one correspondence with all the members of set B, then both sets have the same cardinality.  A2: If set A is a proper subset of set B, then A has a smaller cardinality than set B.  How Cantor defined infinite sets is that he accepted A1 and rejected A2. That is counter-intuitive to me. But mathematicians might say that my intuition is just wrong. So my question is whether we can define infinite sets in another way, i.e. accept A2 but reject A1. That is, the set of even numbers is smaller than the set of all natural numbers, even though both sets have a one-to-one correspondence. If you think this is counter-intuitive because sets with one-to-one correspondence with each other should have the same cardinality, and thus think this is wrong, why can’t I say the same when Cantor accepted A1 and rejected A2? Either way, there is something counter-intuitive and paradoxical.   So, my questions are:   Can we accept A2 and reject A1 for the definition of an infinite set? What arguments, if any, are given for accepting A1 and rejecting A2? Do Stack Overflow and other Stack Exchange sites have an app I can use? Shortcut for "null if object is null, or object.member if object is not null" NORMAL label in top right of some applications I can't (vote to) close a question I voted to close before but then retracted? For example...  I closed a vote for 'too broad'. But then I realized I wanted to close it as a specific duplicate of another question instead. So I retracted my close vote.  That worked. But I can't now vote to close as duplicate and the title says I already voted to close.  Maybe this is intentional but it doesn't feel that way. I was asked this question during an interview for a trading position with a proprietary trading firm. I would very much like to know the answer to this question and the intuition behind it.  Amoeba Question:  A population of amoebas starts with 1. After 1 period that amoeba can divide into 1, 2, 3, or 0 (it can die) with equal probability. What is the probability that the entire population dies out eventually? What documents to show if I'm a US citizen with no US passport to re-enter the US? Suppose I am a naturalized citizen of the US, but also a citizen of another country, "XYZ". I then boarded a plane and left the US to another country (maybe not necessarily to XYZ), without first getting a US passport, but using my old, but valid XYZ passport.   In this case what would be the best documents to have for me to gain entry back into the US as a US Citizen without a passport?  Would I need to contact the US Embassy for help in order to be able return?  If the airline does let me aboard to return to the US, even without the US passport, what are the best documents could I show at the border to prove I am a US citizen but that I just don't have a passport, for whatever reason? The parametric equation  $$\begin{align*} x(t) &amp;= \cos t\\ y(t) &amp;= \sin t \end{align*}$$  traces the unit circle centered at the origin ($x^2+y^2=1$).   Similarly,   $$\begin{align*} x(t) &amp;= \cosh t\\ y(t) &amp;= \sinh t \end{align*}$$  draws the right part of a regular hyperbola ($x^2-y^2=1$).  The hyperbolic trigonometric functions are very similar to the standard trigonometric function.  Do similar functions exist that trace parabolas (because it is another conic section) when set up as parametric equations like the above functions?  If so, are they also similar to the standard and hyperbolic trigonometric functions? How can I take a photo with everything in focus with my DSLR?