Predict function on a Regression model giving error
Predict() - Maybe I'm not understanding it
New passport and entrance Schengen I am from Brazil and travel a lot in Schengen countries. Under the rules of Schengen visa (3 months stay in a 6 months period). In my passport are the entrance and exit stamps, also to chec the days I stay in Schengen.  I need a new passport and will get this in Brazil. So in this new passport are NOT the stamps. Does this mean I start new with the Schengen visa rule? I seems like. The new passport is empty. Or do I miss something? It would be great because I am almost on my 90 days stay in the period of 180 days. What is the difference between Unix, Linux, BSD and GNU? What is the very fundamental difference between Unix, Linux, BSD and GNU?  Unix was the earliest OS, so the term 'Unix like' is understandable, since they have kernel, file system structure, most of the commands, users etc are same as Unix.  Still why are they different? What made them set apart? Is it the kernel? Monty hall problem extended. Find all $n\in\mathbb N^+$ such that the sum of the digits of $5^n$ is equal to $2^n$.   I've solved this, but I think the proof is a bit weird and I wonder if there's a better one.    My proof:  We can see that $n\neq 1$, $n\neq 2$, $n=3$, $n\neq 4$ and $n\neq 5$.  Let $n&gt;5$. Notice that $5^6$ has $5$ digits, while $\frac{2^6}{9}=7\frac{1}{9}$, so $5^6$ has to have at least $8$ digits in order for the sum of the digits to be able to at least reach $2^6$.  Everytime $1$ is added to the exponent of $5$, the amount of digits $5^n$ gets is at most $1$, while $\frac{2^{n+1}}{9}-\frac{2^n}{9}=\frac{2^n}{9}&gt;3$, so the lowest amount of digits it has to have to reach $2^n$ becomes higher by at least $4$.  When $n=6$, the amount of digits $5^n$ has is already lower than the amount it has to have in order to reach $2^n$, and I've just proved that the amount it has to have in order to reach $2^n$ grows faster than the amount of digits $5^n$ has, therefore $5^n$ will never be able to reach $2^n$ when $n&gt;5$.  Hence the only solution is $n=3$. Why is this match pattern unreachable when using non-literal patterns? I am wondering how to differentiate all these different joins ... Test if there are files matching a pattern in order to execute a script I am trying to write an if statement to test whether there are any files matching a certain pattern. If there is a text file in a directory it should run a given script.  My code currently:  if [ -f /*.txt ]; then ./script fi   Please give some ideas; I only want to run the script if there is a .txt in the directory. A few years ago, I applied for a UK visa. The visa was initially refused and I had no rights of appeal. However, the refusal letter had some glaring mistakes and I sent an email to the Embassy. The refusal was "overturned" by an ECM.  I am now making an application for a visa which has the question "Have you ever been refused a visa?". How should I answer it? Non-principal ideal in $K[x,y]$? Let $K$ be a field. Then $K[x,y]$ is not a PID because $x$ is irreducible but the quotient $K[x,y]/(x)$ is isomorphic to $K[y]$, which is not a field.  So there must be an ideal in there which is not principal. What is an example of such an ideal? The projection of an ellipse is still an ellipse While studying the problem of determining the orbit of a binary star system, my astronomy notes say: "the projection of an ellipse onto a plane is still an ellipse (except the special case in which it's a segment)". How could I prove this?  EDIT: As suggested i'm adding what I know about ellipses. I know the basics of ellipses in the plane, the equation of an ellipse in a plane in cartesia coordinates, the equation of an ellipse in polar coordinates, the fact that ellipses can be obtained by the intersection of planes with a cone. In my geometry course we defined ellipses as the the points of the plane such that the ratio between the distance from a point and a line is constant and less than 1. I also know that the sum of the distances of the points of the ellipse from the foci is constant. What is the difference between a builtin command and one that is not? reflecting direct light on glossy surface in Cycles Working in Cycles.  Say I have a "disco ball" with a glossy shader. I'm pointing a spot light to it, and I'm trying to have the reflections of that light illuminate the diffuse material on the walls with the patterns from the ball.    I get this:    but I'd like to get something like:    For the illustration I placed a point light inside the ball an removed faces. But what I'd like to do is move the light around the ball so that the light reflected from it changes like it would do in real life.   Is that possible at this point?  EDIT:  Just for the record here's the image rendered in LuxRender (yet another program to learn...) Change elements on different positions within a list What is the name of an anime from 80s-90s movie/series in which there is a scene, maybe the end, where a girl (who has an​ armor) exchanges age with a dying man in a beach, so the man transforms into a baby and the girl grows to a woman? A square matrix $n \times n$ is an invertible matrix iff the rank of the matrix is $n$. Is Myopia Reversible/Curable? 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? Given $f_{n} : [a,b]\rightarrow \mathbb R$ is uniformly Lipschitz and $f_{n}\rightarrow f$, how can I show that $f$ is Lipschitz?  $f_{n}$ is uniformly Lipschitz $\leftrightarrow \exists K &gt; 0$ such that for all $n$ and for every $x,y\in [a,b]$ we have $|f_{n}(x)-f_{n}(y)| &lt; K|x-y|$.  $f_{n}\rightarrow f \leftrightarrow \forall~\epsilon&gt;0~~\exists~N$ such that $\forall~n&gt;N$ we have $\mid f_{n}(x) - f(x)\mid&lt;\epsilon~~~(=\mid x-y\mid?)$  Then we have  \begin{align} |f(x)-f(y)| &amp;\leq |f(x)- f_{n}(x)| + |f_{n}(y)-f(y)| + |f_{n}(x)-f_{n}(y)| \\ &amp;\leq |x-y| + |x-y| + K|x-y| \\ &amp;\leq (K + 2) |x - y| \end{align}  which shows that $f$ is Lipschitz. Can anybody tell me if this makes sense? Sorry if layout is poor. Why there isn't reputation points for successful flagging? By helping the site by flagging successfully (and therefore gaining higher flag weight), you typically inform that you are able to understand the system and be helpful.  Similarly, when you are helpful by editing posts (not necessarily even understanding anything, just making it better), you gain 2 points for each edit. Good flagging may require even more understanding; while editing just fixing spelling and/or formatting gives reputation points. You don't have to understand whether question (or answer) is on-topic, or even meaningful.  So, why there isn't for example 2 points for each flag that was acted on, in the same way flag weight increase is determined? What punctuation should follow after a list introduced by a colon? The whole department: John, Jeff, Jean, and the accountant [?] were thrown into jail.