English practice
Understanding English (Listening skills)
How to highlight whole row and column under cursor in OpenOffice Calc? I need to work with large table. Something like in this illustation image will be helpfull for better orientation:    Is there some settings which makes this possible? Add field "tome" to biblatex entries I need to add a new field in the @book or @InProceedings entries: this field is "tome", for I have for instance the following title:  Francesco Bertolini, Società di trasmissione orale: mito e folclore, in Lo spazio letterario della Grecia antica, a cura di G. Cambiano, L. Canfora e D. Lanza, vol. I, tomo I, Salerno, Roma 1992, pp. 47--75.   So the following code is not enough:  @InProceedings{ bertolini:1992,   author                   = "Francesco Bertolini",   title                    = "Società di trasmissione orale: mito e folclore",   booktitle                = "Lo spazio letterario della Grecia antica",   editor                   = "G. Cambiano and L. Canfora and D. Lanza",   publisher                = "Salerno",   location                 = "Roma",   year                     = "1992",   volume                   = "1,   pages                    = "47--75", }   Using othes codes, I was able only to produce the "tome" field, but with a general trouble about the other fields:  \DeclareSourcemap{   \maps[datatype=bibtex]{     \map{       \step[fieldsource=tome,fieldtarget=usera]     }   } } \DeclareFieldFormat{usera}{tomo\space{#1}}   \DeclareBibliographyDriver{book}{%   \usebibmacro{author/editor}%   \setunit{\labelnamepunct}\newblock   \usebibmacro{title}%   \newunit\newblock   \usebibmacro{journal+issuetitle}%   \setunit{\bibpagespunct}%   \printfield{pages}%   \newunit\newblock   \printfield{usera}%   \usebibmacro{finentry}} \renewcommand*{\finentrypunct}{}   (useful for articles, but not for my case). By real, I'm not able to understand  which bibmascros I have to invocate...  I tried to write a biblatex-tome.dbx:  \ProvidesFile{biblatex-tome.dbx}   \DeclareDatamodelFields[type=field,datatype=literal,skipout=false]{tome}   \DeclareDatamodelEntryfields{tome}   Inside the main .tex file I put just this code:  \DeclareFieldFormat{tome}{\mkbibacro{tome}\addcolon\space #1} \newcommand*{\patchmoretome}[1]{   \xpatchbibdriver{#1}%     {\printfield{tome}}     {\printfield{tome}%           \newunit\newblock      \printfield{tome}}%     {\typeout{patching #1 to include more tome succeded}}%     {\typeout{patching #1 to include more tome failed}}% } % patch all drivers \patchmoretome{article} \patchmoretome{book} \patchmoretome{collection} \patchmoretome{inbook} \patchmoretome{incollection} \patchmoretome{inproceedings} \patchmoretome{manual} \patchmoretome{periodical} \patchmoretome{proceedings} \patchmoretome{report} \patchmoretome{thesis}   but it doesn't print the field in bibliographic entry. So I'm very confused about a (re)writing of driver LaTeX/BibTex not arranging citations by order of appearance Can't reset WordPress password I haven't logged onto my blog for years, and have, of course, forgotten the password. I click the 'Forgot' button and get a mail with a link, but that mail already says     Sorry, that key does not appear to be valid.   And sends me round the click to reset, receive a mail, click the link again etc. As if the timeout for password resets has been set to 0.5s or something.  This is a shared hosted blog, so I have full access to cPanel and all of the WP files via FTP, if that helps anything. If $\Sigma \vdash \varphi$ then $\Sigma \vdash \forall x \varphi$. Why when $(\varphi \implies \forall x \varphi)$ is not true? In the book of first order logic I'm reading they say that if $(\varphi_1,...,\varphi_n)$ is a proof from a set of formulae $\Sigma$, then so is $(\varphi_1,...,\varphi_n,\forall x \varphi_j)$ for all $1\leq j \leq n$. They assume that as an axiom but it doesn't make sense to me. Why if $\varphi$ is true then so is $\forall x \varphi$? For example if $\varphi$ is $x=1$ that wouldn't mean that $\forall x : x=1$ , or would it?  Maybe what I don't understand is: why $(\Sigma \vdash \varphi \implies \Sigma \vdash \forall x \varphi)$ is true but $(\varphi \implies \forall x \varphi)$ is not true?  The book is this: Problem using wildcard with apt When I run this command :  apt install libkf5*   I get the following error :  Unable to locate package libkf5*    I'm sure that the packages whose names start with libkf5 exist (tab-completion says so) . So the problem is not about the absence of those packages.(Note the asterisk at the end of that error message , the wildcard's not working at all) I use apt v.1.9. Thanks in advance. How to remove a repository? Windows vs Linux Local Time? Why do people rule out local hidden variables? I bet the automatic response to my question would be "Bell's theorem" and of course I am not disputing Bell's proof. I am however uncertain of one of his assumptions.  The so called "no conspiracy" assumption states that we somehow posses this magical thing called free will which makes us able to break free from the causal chain of events that make us measure the $y$-axis instead of the $x$-axis and so on in experiments. Obviously this makes little sense once reviewed under the light of logic. What this naturally implies is that, if a theory is fully deterministic, it is instantly super-deterministic.  Simon Kochen and John Conway published a theorem in 2009, , which simply-put states: either everything is deterministic (super-deterministic) or every particle has free will.  Among the few who accept this to the fullest extent is Gerard 't Hooft. He has proposed that what we call sub-atomic particles are really just templates and that there is a realm beneath the quantum where the true fabric of reality is "hidden". By accepting determinism he escapes Bell's theorem (due to not having to accept the "no conspiracy" assumption) and can construct a local, deterministic and realist hypothesis of reality. In Gerard 't Hooft's model there is cellular automata somewhere near the Planck scale which gives rise to the "emergent quantum mechanics".  This means that there exist no superpositions in objective reality, the cat is always either dead or alive, no collapse of wave functions, no branching universes, non-locality or retro-causality.  The big question for me is basically: Why do people have such a hard time accepting determinism? Some will object and say "oh but it's SUPER-determinism", but that makes no sense whatsoever, either everything is determined (determinism) or only somethings are (quasi-determinism). By accepting it we escape Bell's theorem. Bell himself was well aware of this and mentioned it a few times in interviews in the 80's.  I know some are concerned that if we accept complete determinism we can no longer do science because it's all a HUGE CONSPIRACY. Gerard 't Hooft has answered critics who bring up this here: , section 6.  Additionally, another author who has taken a deeper look into the worries of "conspiracies" in QM interpretations is Peter J. Lewis in his paper  (also ).  So to all of you who dismiss local hidden variables I ask: Why? Form inside a table Footnotes in tables? I would like to have footnotes in tables, but the \footnote command does not work inside a table environment.  Googling one finds that this is , at least in the UK.  That link contains a list of solutions to the problem, but since the author of the FAQ does not believe that this is good style, no comparison is made between the different methods.  I am sure that there are good typographical reasons why in most situations it is undesirable to have footnotes in tables (although I have never come across them), however I have recently felt the need to do just this in a paper I am currently writing.  Therefore I'd like to ask two questions:   What are the arguments against footnotes in tables? If one really must go against the advice in 1., which method (whether considered in the  or not) would you recommend?   Thanks in advance.  Added  In response to ShreevatsaR's comment: I do not much care for where the text of the footnote appears.  I do however insist on the footnote marks being attached to the relevant entries in the table, so that I can avoid having to reference "the second entry in the eighth line of the table", etc... A non-trivial normal subgroup N of a finite group G or order $p^n$ is such that $N\cap Z(G)\neq \{ 1\}$ Let $N\neq 1$ be a normal subgroup of G, where G has order $p^n$, $p$ prime, $n\geq 1$.  I need to show that $Z(G)\cap N\neq \{1\}$.  I have tried to do it this way: Suppose $|N|=p^m$, $m&lt;n$. Since $N\cap Z(G)$ is normal in $Z(G)$, in both cases ($N\cap Z(G)=\{1\}$ and $N\cap Z(G)\neq\{ 1\}$), I used the Second Group Isomorphisms Theorem to get:  $G/N\cong Z(G)/N\cap Z(G)$  so $|G/N| = |Z(G)/N\cap Z(G)|$  Since N is normal in G, $|G/N|=p^{n-m}$, with $n-m&gt;0$. So $|Z(G)/N|\cap Z(G)|=p^{n-m}\Rightarrow [Z(G):N\cap Z(G) ]=p^{n-m}$  and this means that $N\cap Z(G)\neq \{1\}$. the numer of partial function between two sets in combinatoric way $A$ and $B$ two sets. $|A|=k, |B|=n.$ I need to prove in a combinatoric way that the number of partial function from $A$ to $B$ is $(n+1)^k.$ I thing the number is $Σ(n^i),$ for $i=0$ to $k.$ but I have no idea how to show equality, and how to prove it in a combinatoric way.  If someone can show me the way or guide me that will be great!  thanks for helpers. I'm learning Neural Networks and I grasped the algebra behind them. I'm now interested in understanding how normalization and centering of the input data affect them. In my personal learning project (Regression with NN) I've transformed my input variables to a range between 0 and 1 using the following function:  normalize &lt;- function(x) {return((x - min(x))/ (max(x) - min(x)))}   The NN model fits well and has an acceptable out-of-sample prediction error.   However, I read in other  that scaling the inputs to have mean 0 and a variance of 1 is advised for NN. I don't fully understand:   how this transformation works better for NN against the min-max normalization between 0 and 1. how can I assess which transformation to apply in my data? override at runtime __setattr__ Why is my StackOverflow with an indent and doesn't have reputation Well everything is in the title. Why is StackOverflow showing up with a indent and why don't I see my rep next to it like on the other websites. Picklist dependent on 2 controlling picklist I have 3 picklist in an object Test1, Test2, Test3  1. Test2 is dependent on Test1  2. Test3 is dependent on both.. Test1 and Test2    I want to have Test3 picklist showing values accordindly. i.e  if U selected Test1 = First and Test2 = SA . I should be able to see "IST,ABC and PQR" in Test 3.   Is this possible??? A continuous mapping is determined by its values on a dense set When I open a window to air out the room, how does the smell disperse? Let's say I'm in a room with some kind of noxious stink, possibly of flatulent nature.  The quickest way to right the world that comes to mind is to open a window.  When I open a window, how do the stank particles leave the room? enumitem breaks beamer's itemize despite fixes I thought I had tamed enumitem. I had this  and this .  Then I tried a [&lt;+-&gt;] construct. It failed. Commmenting the enumitem section prevents errors but I'd rather not have to do this.  On its current state, this code produces two errors, one because of the [&lt;+-&gt;] and another because of the \onslide.   \documentclass{beamer}   \usepackage{enumitem}  \setitemize{label=\usebeamerfont*{itemize item}%    \usebeamercolor[fg]{itemize item}    \usebeamertemplate{itemize item}}%https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/24491  \setenumerate[1]{%    label=\protect\usebeamerfont{enumerate item}%          \protect\usebeamercolor[fg]{enumerate item}%          \insertenumlabel.}%https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/45950   \begin{document}  \begin{frame}  \begin{itemize}[&lt;+-&gt;]  \item 1  \item 2  \end{itemize}  \onslide&lt;2&gt;{text}  \end{frame}  \end{document}