Maybe is an adverb.  Normally, people put "Maybe" at the beginning of a sentence.  Ex: Maybe we have a problem  My question is:  Do we put "maybe" before a verb? Ex: "We maybe have a problem" it sounds very strange.  It is very good if your answer includes some referencing source.
Consider the following sentences:        I'll move to the south by then probably.   I'll probably move to the south by then.   I'll move to the south probably by then.      Which of the three is correct. In my opinion, the third one is wrong. First two are correct with a small difference in their meaning.  First one makes my probability refer to the time when I'll be moving and the second one tells that there is still a chance that I might not move.  Am I correct?
Let $ \boldsymbol{x} $ be a vector of $n$ numbers in the range $ \left[0, c \right] $, where $ c $ is a positive real number.  What's is the maximum of the variance function of this $ n $ numbers? Maximum in the meaning what spread of the number will maximize the variance? What would be a tighter bound for other assumptions on the spread of the numbers.  The variance of the vector $ \boldsymbol{x} $ is given by:  $$ \operatorname{var} (\boldsymbol{x}) = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i = 1}^{n} {\left( {x}_{i} - \overline{\mathbf{x}} \right )}^2 $$  Where the mean $\overline{\boldsymbol{x}}$ is given by:  $$ \overline{\boldsymbol{x}} = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i = 1}^{n} {x}_{i} $$ How do I give players already enchanted Tools/Armour/Weapons I'm making a map where I want players to be able to choose there kits/classes. The problem I'm having with it though is giving players already enchanted Tools/Armour/Weapons.  I'm not sure if you can use the /give [player] [item] [amount] because you'll have to use the whole {} thing and I'm not sure how to make enchanted Tools/Armour/Weapons using that.  Can anyone help? Can the expression $\sqrt{n} + \sqrt{m}$ be rational if neither $n,m \in \mathbb{N}$ are perfect squares? It doesn't seem likely, the only way that could happen is if for example $\sqrt{m} = a-\sqrt{n}, \ \ a \in \mathbb{Q}$, which I don't think is possible, but how to show it? How can I mitigate edge halo when darkening skies in post-processing? Show that $\sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - \bar{x})(y_i - \bar{y}) = \sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - \bar{x})(y_i)$. Show that $\sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - \bar{x})(y_i - \bar{y}) = \sum_{i=1}^{n} (x_i - \bar{x})(y_i)$. I fell into this hole where I keep finding that $$\sum_{i=1}^n (x_i - \bar{x}) = \sum_{i=1}^n x_i - \sum_{i=1}^n \bar{x} = n\bar{x} - n\bar{x} = 0$$ This seems true, but I know that I am missing something, since this implies that covariance is always zero, which is obviously not true. Every season near the trade deadline, we see teams that are out of it trading expensive players and/or free agents-to-be, typically for younger players or prospects.  For example, Matt Garza, set to become a free agent after the season, was traded to the Rangers for a few prospects.  It made sense for the Cubs to trade Garza, because he wasn't under contract any further than this season, and thus doesn't have much value to them.  Compare Garza to someone like Mike Trout, who is likely the most valuable property in baseball, given his skill and inexpensive cost over the next several years.  There's no way the Angels would trade him, because he'll be the cost-controlled centerpiece of the team for years to come.  However, with the Angels out of it this year, what if they wanted to trade Trout to a contender (say the Pirates), but only for the remainder of this season?  That is, they'd get several top prospects now, and would have an agreement with the Pirates that they'd trade him back in the offseason (for something pretty worthless, say for a journeyman minor leaguer).  The Pirates get Trout for the stretch run and are happy to give up a few prospects.  Trout doesn't have much value to the Angels this year, but he has a ton of value for next year.  So they get a few prospects for him, in exchange for the part of his career which has very little value to them.  So in effect, the Pirates are renting or borrowing him for the remainder of 2013.  Why don't trades like this happen?  Are there any rules prohibiting trades like this? ImageView without xml definition Is it okay to record audio for a lecture? Sometimes the Professor will say things quickly, or say things before I can write them down. It would be of great benefit if I could record audio for the course, but I am not sure the legal guidelines around doing so. What is the integral of 1/x? What is the integral of $\frac{1}{x}$? Do you get $\ln(x)$ or $\ln|x|$? In general, does integrating $f'(x)/f(x)$ give $\ln(f(x))$ or $\ln|f(x)|$? Also, what is the derivative of $|f(x)|$? Is it $f'(x)$ or $|f'(x)|$? How to use different domains for multilingual sites and keep users logged in? I have a site that is in French and English. I am able to successfully setup so that users can switch back and forth between the two domains to view either language, however I cannot seem to keep users logged in. When they are logged into the english domain and then switch to the french domain they are required to login again. However if they switch back to the english domain they are still logged in.  As an example we'll use www.english-domain.com as the base (default) domain and www.french-domain.com as the secondary domain  In settings.php I have modified the following, however it doesn't seem to be keeping them logged in. Am I missing something?  /**  * Drupal automatically generates a unique session cookie name for each site  * based on its full domain name. If you have multiple domains pointing at the  * same Drupal site, you can either redirect them all to a single domain (see  * comment in .htaccess), or uncomment the line below and specify their shared  * base domain. Doing so assures that users remain logged in as they cross  * between your various domains.  */ $cookie_domain = 'english-domain.com';   Note: That I have also flushed both site and browser cache as well as deleted any cookies left on my machine.  Update:  Here are my language settings: Deserializing JSON when sometimes array and sometimes object What happens to the temperature when an ideal gas is compressed? I am rather confused about this. I know from Charles' law that under constant pressure, the volume of a gas is directly proportional to its absolute temperature i.e.  $$\frac{V_1}{T_1} = \frac{V_2}{T_2}$$  Thus accordingly, during compression, temperature of the gas would decrease. But in Lectures of physics ,vol 1 by Feynman, it is written:     Suppose that the piston moves inward, so that the atoms are slowly compressed into a smaller space. What happens when an atom hits the moving piston? Evidently it picks up speed from the collision. [...] So the atoms are "hotter" when they come away from the piston than they were before they struck it. Therefore all the atoms which are in the vessel will have picked up speed. This means that when we compress a gas slowly, the temperature of the gas increases.   (Constant pressure?) So, this is contrary to Charles' law. Why does this happen? Who is right? Or are they both correct? I am confused. Help. Linear Discriminant Analysis for $p=1$ Green is the most common circuit-board color because it has become an industry standard.  What I'm interested in is How the traditional "PCB Green" become a standard in the first place?   Were there any interesting historical reasons for the initial choice, or was it just a product of what one particularly successful company was doing that became the de-facto standard? Are actions and bonus actions interchangeable? Steps to solve this system of equations: $\sqrt{x}+y=7$, $\sqrt{y}+x=11$ How do I unit test code that includes a callout? Similar to '', is it also ok to add an example?   I was going to  but I noticed that one answer had most of the things I needed to say, except perhaps that the questioner didn't perhaps understand the answer and  I feel that an example may help. When did the word "so" begin to be used to start a sentence? In the last few years, I've noticed a growing usage of the word "so" to begin a sentence, especially in the context of higher education.  For example:   Interviewer: "What is the nature of your research"  Researcher: "So, what we wanted to find out is..."  It seems to be a replacement the word "well", or, more informally, "ok".  Has this usage of the word been around for a long time and I'm just now noticing it?  Do you think that is a valid use of the word? Most efficient way to test equality of lambda expressions