Problem with tracking
Correct tracked camera orientation
How do you convert a cake recipe to make brownies? How do I completely remove Ubuntu? Plotting a function with an argument in degrees I want to plot a function. The function is, F is proportional to x/cos(x). Here x is rotation in degree and F is the force. I have to plot the graph where the x axis will be from 0 to 70 degree and the y axis will be linear value 0 to 5. I am not able to find any option to draw graphs where x axis is with rotational degree. My table doesn't fit; what are my options? I have a table that I want to insert on a page, but at least one (perhaps both) of the following conditions are met:   The table is too wide to fit within the text block or page. That is, I'm exceeding some horizontal restriction. The table is too tall to fit within the text block or page. That is, I'm exceeding some vertical restriction.   What are my options to make this table fit? If it doesn't fit, regardless of my attempts, what other options exist? Consider this reverse biased diode :     I read that no or very small current flows in reverse biased diode as depletion layers get widened and huge resistance is offered so no electrons can cross it. But, why the electrons or holes need to cross the depletion layer? In the diagram above, the positive charges (holes) are moving towards left and the current due to electrons is also in left, so won't the circuit be completed? Coauthoring with a reviewer possible? I recently submitted an article to a math journal and got a response from a reviewer, with an attachment. In it, I have found some good  advice that could improve my article tremendously.  I am a bit suspicious of its accuracy since it could resolve what I have been working with for some months in a few  sentences.   But anyway, it was enough for me to ask the reviewer for coauthoring with me.   My question would be, does it often happen that an author asks a referee for coauthoring during the review process? Or could it even be possible?  I was given a month to revise my article, but the chance that I could revise successfully by myself seems to be fat.  I would be looking forward to any advice.  Thanks in advance. Automatically login and lock I want to configure Windows 7 to login automatically after the computer is switched on. That's not because I'm lazy and don't like typing passwords. That's because I want programs that are configured to run on startup run automatically.  But I don't want everyone to see my desktop, so I want my computer to remain locked. When I'm ready to work, I just type my password and don't have to wait until all startup programs run. Recommend a statistics fundamentals book To give you some background, I have a grasp on the basics of statistics and probability theory and even remember touching Bayes theorem at the university data mining course. But being a few years away from the university made my math got extremely rusty (so much for last-minute pre-exam cramming). While I remember various random basic concepts, there are a lot of gaps in my understanding of them.  What would be a good material (a book, a site, or otherwise equally accessible medium) to revise the fundamentals and go beyond basics? I'd like a book that can be actually read as a book (most statistics books are really dry and are close to being reference material, rather than a book). Suppose $f$ and $g$ are Lebesgue measurable, we want to show $f+g$ is measurable. So, the hint is to consider the continuous functions $F : \mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R} $ given by $h(x) = F(f ,g ) $. If we can show $F$ Is measurable, then Taking $F = f +g $ would solve our problem.  In other words, I want to show that the set $R = \{ (f,g) : F(f,g) &gt; a $ } is lebesgue measurable.. But this set is just a rectangle in the plane. And since $F$ is continuous, then $R$ must be open, and hence a union of open rectangles which are measurable and hence $R$ must be measurable. Is this a correct approach to the problem? Can someone help me to make this formal? thanks Sequence uniform convergence but the derivatives are not. Give a sequence $(f_n)_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$ of differentiable functions which uniformly converge to $0$, but for which the seqeunce $(f_n')_{n\in \mathbb{N}}$ of the derivatives isn't even pointwise convergent.    I found this one in my textbook marked as "Fun things to solve" and although it may be fun, it's kind of hard to do.   To be honest I already failed at the first hurdle. I couldn't even find a sequence of functions which uniformly converges to $0$.   Is there a certain way of dealing with this kind of problem? Because it seems kind of hard for me to come up with sequences without a mathematical of way of doing so (or maybe there is a mathematical way I just don't know yet). What are acceptable reasons for flagging as "Requires Moderator attention"? After reading , I feel I don't quite understand this function. What are the guidelines for flagging a question as &quot;Requires Moderator attention&quot;? How do I get list of all tables in a database using TSQL? Q: "Do you have any juice?"   A: "Yes, there's some in the fridge."   Sounds perfectly fine to me, but:     Q: "Do you have any towels?"   A: "Yes, there's some in the closet."   Does not.  I asked for towels - plural - so wouldn't "Yes, there're some in the closet," in which there are is turned into a contraction be the correct way to say it?  Spellcheck, however, doesn't like "there're", and I think I'm the only person I've ever heard use the word "there're".  Even folks who I know say "there are" shorten it to "there's" when possible.  Am I saying it wrong, or are both forms acceptable? Ideal in a ring of continuous functions Is ‘half half’ ambiguous? 50-50  Ex) There are half half milk and water. = there are 50:50 milk and water.  1/4  Ex) There is half half water. = there is 1/4 water. Is it right? What are the minimum contributions required for co-authorship $$I(\alpha)=\int_0^1 \frac{x^\alpha-1}{\ln x}dx.$$  As the title says, if someone could solve this without using the differentiation under the integral sign technique, I would be very grateful. Captchas not displaying in SO for me When I get a captcha on Stack Overflow, I don't see the image or the input box with Firefox. I originally had the "HTTPS Anywhere" extension installed but still have the same issue when it's disabled (This caused issues previously when Google's SSL certs were expired for an old domain IIRC).  The requests to Google seem to be never-ending; browsing to the URLs that are still loading results in some pages of JavaScript, but no errors as you'd hope.  The screenshot was taken after the page had been open for more than 3 minutes, and I'm not sure why the GETs are still running. The request popup visible in Firebug is for "GET challenge?k=...."  When browsing to the same captcha page in IE, there are no issues.  I'm aware this could be an issue with my Firefox configuration, as opposed to the site, but would appreciate it if someone could verify if it's just me, and suggest a fix.  EDIT   While visiting the Recaptcha site, I can see a Captcha with no problems If I right-click the problem URLs in FF and Open in new tab, the pages load fine. From the fact that FB omits IP Addresses for the problem ones, I assume that it's not even opening a connection (nor perhaps performing a DNS lookup) Other sites that use Recaptcha seem to work fine (I picked 3 at random from Google) I was on the tube and overheard a dad questioning his kids about maths.  The children were probably about 11 or 12 years old.   After several more mundane questions he asked his daughter what $1/0$ evaluated to. She stated that it had no answer. He asked who told her that and she said her teacher. He then stated that her teacher had "taught it wrong" and it was actually $∞$.  I thought the Dad's statement was a little irresponsible.  Does that seem like reasonable attitude? I suppose this question is partly about morality. At the end of the game, both remaining players have a Baron.   The sum of all cards discarded by both players is equal.  Who wins?