Labeling everything that is auto-forwarded from a (non-Gmail) account
How to create a filter in Gmail to identify messages forwarded from Zimbra?
Windows utility to render which key I am pressing on-screen How many integers between $1$ and $10^4$ contain exactly one $8$ and one $9$? I have this problem: How many integers between $1$ and $10^4$ contain exactly one $8$ and one $9$?, but i dont know if $18, 19, 28, 29...$ serve, else it could be $8$ y $9 = 2$ numbers, help please. How to calculate $\lim \limits_{n \to \infty}(1 +\frac{a}{n})^n$? How do you list the primary key of a SQL Server table? Blender render crash when using subsurf modifiers. differences between 2 JUnit Assert classes The JUnit framework contains 2 Assert classes (in different packages, obviously) and the methods on each appear to be very similar. Can anybody explain why this is?  The classes I'm referring to are:  and . I am wondering, given the minimal polynomial of $A$, what can we say about the minimal polynomial of $A^n$?  I know that if we were looking at the roots of the characteristic polynomial ie eigenvalues then the roots of the characteristic polynomial of $A^n$ would be $nth$ powers of the eigenvalues so again these are roots of the minimal polynomial also. How to find location using MapKit in Xcode? Could someone with experience in using these exercise typesetting packages please offer a quick compare and contrast of these packages to help me choose?  Packages under consideration are:         Having read briefly the documentation, they all seem to do the same thing generally, so could you please focus on the differences?  Some differences will not be obvious until I've learnt and used all the different packages but I want to better appreciate the differences now, a priori. Can a professor influence the graduate admissions committee if he or she is interested in a particular student? What is the meaning of the density of a distribution at a point? I know how to use PDFs to calculate probabilities, but I don't think I understand them. For example, at $X=0$ the PDF of the standard normal distribution is $\approx 0.4$. Does this have any useful meaning? We write all postive whole integers after the comma, how do we prove that this is an irrational number? ($0.1234567891011121314...$) So I'm at that step where I am finally ready to Render my first big project. Aaaaaand it's been stuck on the first 4 tiles for the last 2 hours?   I am using a MacBook Pro Processor: 2.5 GHz Intel Core i5 Memory: 4 GB 1600 MHz DDR3 Graphics: intel HD Graphics 4000 1024 MB  (I include these because I have no idea what affects a computers ability to render but I assume it's one of them, most liekly the graphics card).  So anyways here are the pictures, as you can see I played with changing the resolution, the sample size and the max steps to see if I got different results but it just keeps getting stuck at those 1st four tiles. I've rendered a few other small projects successfully but this was my first time changing some values. I assume i've managed to accidentally change the wrong values and thats causing some conflict thats either stopping the render itself or is making it just too much for my computer.  My goal was the render this particular picture at a good enough resolution and clarity that it could then be made into a poster. So i wanted the resolution to be good and the sampling to be high.       Since writing this there has been no change to any of the numbers at the top of the render result (the time left, etc) Textarea CSS issue on "needs moderator attention" To reproduce:   Click Flag (question or answer) Click other (needs moderator attention)   The textarea is too wide:  StackOverflow        AskUbuntu        StackExchange        Most probably affects other sites, but didn't check. I think it's enough. :-)  Reproducing on:   Chromium Version 40.0.2214.111 Ubuntu 15.04 (64-bit) Google Chrome Version 41.0.2272.76 (64-bit) Firefox 36.0   (I'm using Ubuntu 15.04) So I've been trying to create a mathematical model for an electric motorcycle and began to wonder about the maximum possible torque that could be supplied to the rear driven wheel without having the bike begin to lift up on one wheel.  I found ways to calculate this value online; however, the basic concept as to how the bike actually lifts escapes me.    My problem started when I began to think about what axis the bike will rotate about when it is doing the wheelie.  My first intuition was that the frame and front wheel, together, rotate about the rear axle.  But when I drew a free body diagram of the frame/front wheel system just at liftoff (see below) I made note that the only forces acting about the rear axle, point O, is the force of weight.  This means that an increase in applied torque and subsequently, the applied force Fa, should not effect the rotation about the rear axle.  I know that the applied force on the back wheel is indeed correlated with the propensity for a bike to wheelie, so I considered that the axis of rotation I was choosing was wrong.  If we take the free body diagram above and sum the moments about the center of mass, we would find that an increased applied force would in fact cause the solid body to rotate.  The problem with this understanding is that during rotation, the center of mass of the drawn system should actually rises relative to the surface the bike is moving across.  If the bike were to be truly rotating about its center of mass, then the back wheel would begin to dip below the surface of the road like you might see in a glitchy video game.    So I suspect that the bike is in fact rotating about the back axle, but I don't understand why, please help!  edit: I added the external torque from the back wheel to the frame, which would allow the bike to rotate about the back axle  edit 2:  I suppose that the torque acting on the frame via the engine should not effect the rotation as the movement of a motorcycle can be perfectly replicated by applying a force at the back axle.  A third possible axis of rotation might be the lowest point of the back wheel. Why is this sentence wrong? "He went to home." Why does the field of an electric dipole drop off as $1/r^3$? Electric field of a point charge drops off inverse squarely but that of a dipole varies as $1/r^3$. Why the field drops off more quickly for a dipole? In Thor: The Dark World, Odin and Loki are discussing Loki's actions during The Avengers.  Loki argues that he would have ruled Earth as &quot;a benevolent god&quot;, and Odin replies:  Odin: We are not gods! We are born, we live, we die, just as humans do.  Now that's pretty definitive.  And Loki's snarky reply (&quot;Give or take five thousand years...&quot;) would seem to confirm that Asgardians have a limited lifespan, and will eventually die of old age.1  And we know that Asgardians can die in battle, because we've seen it happen over and over with supporting characters and Asgardian soldiers. Now, I've always been more of a fan of Thor stories (like Jason Aaron's Thor: God of Thunder arc) in which Thor and the Asgardians are gods.  Straight-up, genuine, higher-level-of-existence gods, not von-Däniken-esque wannabes playing on the tired old notion of magic just being super-advanced science.  BUT, despite my preferences, this exchange would seem to confirm once and for all that in the MCU, the Asgardians are not gods, but rather were mistaken for gods because of their ram-horns full of awesome-sauce and their magnificent bulging pecks. But wait!  Watch that movie for about 30 seconds longer and we come across this exchange:  Thor: She is ill. Odin: She is mortal. Illness is their defining trait.  Wait, what?  I thought Asgardians weren't immortal?  They can die in battle, and they naturally die of old age.  In my book, that makes them long-lived, but entirely &quot;mortal&quot;.  Surely Odin isn't splitting a hair so fine as to say that resistance to disease alone makes one &quot;immortal&quot;? So, if the Asgardians of the MCU aren't actually gods (grumblegrumblegrumble...), and they can't live forever (or even particularly long in a cosmic sense), and they can be killed in battle, in what sense are they &quot;immortal&quot; at all?  1 Fun fact: adjusted for a roughly 5,000 year lifespan, 1,048-year-old Loki is currently in the tail-end of his rebellious teenage phase. Context  I'm having trouble understanding the limited situations in which qualifiers can be distributed.  I am given that the rules are:  $$\forall x\left[P(x)\land Q(x)\right]\equiv\forall xP(x) \land\forall xQ(x) \tag{1}$$ $$\exists x\left[P(x)\lor Q(x)\right]\equiv\exists xP(x) \lor\exists xQ(x) \tag{2}$$  $$\forall x\left[P(x)\lor Q(x)\right]\not\equiv\forall xP(x) \lor\forall xQ(x) \tag{3}$$ $$\exists x\left[P(x)\land Q(x)\right]\not\equiv\exists xP(x) \land\exists xQ(x) \tag{4}$$    Questions   What are examples of $P(x)$ and $Q(x)$ that illustrate when these statements are true? How can I show these statements always hold using proofs? Why can't "$\forall x$" be distributed in example 3 or "$\exists x$" in example 4? I want to power my DIY stuff with a MacBook Pro USB C charger. The label on a charger says that it can provide three different power profiles:    20.2V - 4.3A 9V - 3A 5.2V - 2.4A   There is a ton of information about what USB-C power distribution is capable of, but I can't find any examples of how exactly to do it.   Is there an easy way or workaround to request one of those power profiles without using a microcontroller?  For example, I got apple MacBook Pro charger, apple USB-C cable, and a breakout board like this one: