Can't install experimental modules
Can't install experimental modules
Does the VBA "And" operator evaluate the second argument when the first is false? I noted that if I use comment.sty and a there is a block of text containing UTF8 characters inside a comment environment, the compilation aborts!  Minimal Example  \documentclass{article} \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} \RequirePackage[utf8]{inputenc}%this file is stored as UTF8 file! \RequirePackage{comment} \specialcomment{privateSolution}     {\begingroup\itshape\noindent\textbf{Solution}\\}     {\endgroup} %\excludecomment{privateSolution}%Use it to remove solutions!  \begin{document} \title{Comment.sty and UTF8 test file} \maketitle \section{UTF8 character test} In which alphabet characters àìùòè are common? \begin{privateSolution}     The Italian alphabet contains àìùòè. \end{privateSolution}  \begin{comment}     The Italian one! It contains àìùòè. \end{comment} \end{document}   Has anyone the same problem? Any workaround?  Thanks in advance. In Harry Potter and the philosophers stone Harry was "receiving" his letters in a way that was so labour intensive. First, one was sent in the mail, and the others where then sent, either shoved into the letterbox or through the door cracks. It then it got, "out of hand," as twenty four letters found their way inside the house. The letter sender (Minerva, I do believe, Deputy Headmistress) must, obviously have known they were not getting to Harry, so why keep sending them? I cannot even believe Minerva sending more than thirty letters! Why not either,  A) Send the letters directly to Harry  OR  B) Show up at the house, to explain everything.  Why not do a more logical way of sending/explaining Harry's being? Proving $\sqrt{2}+\sqrt[3]{3}$ is algebraic. What is a smart pointer and when should I use one? What is a smart pointer and when should I use one? Where can I ask about Software Licenses/Licensing? Unwanted faint lines connecting dashed double line Does adding two linear equations will result in a line which will pass through an intersection of the linear equations? I was wondering why it is almost impossible to find a geometrical explanation of why adding two linear equations helps us to find a solution of a system of linear equations? Am I right that adding two linear equations will result in an equation of a line which will pass through a point where two linear equations intersect?  If it is right then I completely don't understand why such a crucial point in understanding how to solve systems of equations is never properly taught even at a university level. Where did the "Magic Blood" of the Harry Potter Universe Originate From? What is a wizard that makes them non-Muggle? Or, more directly, what ancestry does the witch/wizard gene follow? Is there a patriarchal wizard (or matriarchal witch) that Muggles have no part in? Elves perhaps? Stop reading here.  Purpose of the Question/History/Don't Read There seem to be solid consequences associated with being Muggle, or Muggle-related. A dominant theme in the novels is discrimination against the non-gifted race, but, when read into, the wizard bloodline doesn't appear all that well defined. JKR indicates that wizard-ness is genetic, or inherited:  &quot;Muggle-borns will have a witch or wizard somewhere on their family tree, in some cases many, many generations back. The gene resurfaces in some unexpected places.&quot;  By the above, it stands that a family that produces a squib (non-magical born of magical parents) must be a half-blooded family in some way, since half-blooded only requires one non-magical ancestor. Of course, we are dealing in magic genetics. Any other form of genetics would make this inherited, seemingly recessive trait (or squibs couldn't exist), never appear at all. Unless they were XMen. If it is so important, what does the wizard-bloodline follow? Other Mythos In other literature a wizard can be nearly anything, but magical powers are typically inherited as well as learned. Merlin of the Arthurian Legend (also mentioned in HP) is Cambian, meaning he is born of demonic intervention; this explains his source of enchantment. Gandalf of Middle Earth is a Maiar, as are all Wizards of Middle Earth. Wizards in Harry Potter seem to follow a bloodline, and it has been mentioned (in the question Gabe linked) that genetics have a heavy play in it, meaning that squibs and parents of Muggle-born wizards should have identical genetics. This bloodline must come from somewhere. Magical Creatures In Harry Potter it is common for magical creatures to &quot;mingle&quot; with humans, these beings are typically somewhat magical. Elves have been described to have very strong magic, but are for some unreasonable reason subservient to humans. I may be mistaken, but believe it was hinted that elves and the wizarding lineage had intersected at one time. Maybe I'm imagining this. Genocidal Allusions Voldemort hates muggles, and half-bloods, and whatever else is non-wizard. The presence of this theme, suggests that this wizardly bloodline must be at least defined if the main antagonist is so obsessed with keeping that mysterious bloodline pure. Since Slytherin himself was said to be a supremacist (circa a really long time ago) it suggests that this bloodline should have existed long before he was around, especially if he founded a school with people he was not related to, but were also magical. Issue with using ContactID as subscriber key in Marketing Cloud We have set up our Sales Cloud - Marketing Cloud integration where Contact ID is used as the subscriber key.  What we've noticed is when we have contact ID as the subscriber relationship on our sendable data extension, Marketing Cloud will reference contact ID on All Subscribers list and if data matches, it will send to the email address listed on All Subscribers and not to the one on the data extension.  This has caused us headaches for a number of reasons:   Email addresses always change so the one on All Subscribers is out-of-date. Whilst preference center can update a recipients address and write this back to All Subscribers that not how most addresses are updated by the user Email address is typically updated in Sales Cloud instance and migrated to Marketing Cloud either through imports or via synchronized data extensions.  It does not map directly to All Subscribers. Marketing Cloud users assume (and quite rightly) the address listed on the data extension is what will be used in the send. Not the one on All subscribers.   Anyone else experienced this? Any solution to resolve this issue? What's the difference between using single and double quotation marks/inverted commas? Having trouble finding Plantera's Bulb I have been playing on hardmode for a while and have beaten the three  a couple of times. But I have yet to find a . It's getting really frustrating.  Does anyone have any methods to finding a Plantera Bulb? Intuition behind measurable random variables and $\sigma$-algebra I've been trying to understand $\sigma$-algebras and how it encodes information in context of filtration. While certain parts seem clear and logical, I can't say I get the whole picture.  I'll try to explain the counter-intuition I get with the classical example of : the probability space $\Omega = \{ HH, HT, TH, TT \}$ and a r.v. $X(\omega)$ equal to the number of heads.  At times $0$, $1$ and $2$ the available information is represented using $\sigma$-algebras $\mathcal{F}_0=\{\emptyset,\Omega\}$, $\mathcal{F}_1=\{\emptyset, \Omega, \{HH,HT\},\{TH,TT\}\}$ and $\mathcal{F}_2=\{\emptyset, \Omega,\{HH,HT\},\{TH,TT\},\{HH\},\{HT\},\{TH\},\{TT\}\}$.  One can notice that $X(\omega)$ is not measurable with respect to $\mathcal{F}_0$ and $\mathcal{F}_1$, because $X^{-1}((\frac{3}{2}; +\infty))=\{HH\}$. To me it is quite surprising: intuitively $X$ makes perfect sense at all times. In particular it has an expected value at time $0$, which I interpret as that the probability and value of all outcomes $\{\omega\}$ can be computed. How do you think of a non-measurable function?  Here's another way of expressing the same confusion. The most natural choice of $\sigma$-algebra in a finite discrete case is $\mathcal{F}=2^\Omega$, and it is implicitly used in all elementary probability problems. However, this choice of $\mathcal{F}$ does not reflect the fact that some information is known or unknown, conditional probability does. Does it mean that the statement "$\sigma$-algebra is known information" make sense only in conditioning? Why is it convenient then? ConTeXt: Flush right formula numbers in cases environment I would like to have the formula numbers of the cases environment flush right like regular formulas (not at a fixed distant from the cases like it is by default with the default setting numberdistance=2.5\emwidth). How can I do that?  \starttext  \startplaceformula     \startformula         \startcases             \NC x = 1 \NR[+]             \NC y = 1 \NR[+]         \stopcases     \stopformula \stopplaceformula  \stoptext     What I want (but with the left bracket):  \starttext  \startplaceformula     \startformula         \startalignment[n=1]             \NC x = 1 \NR[+]             \NC y = 1 \NR[+]         \stopalignment     \stopformula \stopplaceformula  \stoptext Keeping an updated balance (Accounting) I have been struggling trying to find a way to properly and reliably maintain a balance for accounts in an order/payment system.  Currently, the process consists of three tables. Below example is very simplified but gets the point across.  Table one contains the account ID, name, total paid, total orders, balance etc.  Table two contains payments, date, the account ID (FK) and amount.  Table three contains orders, date, the account ID (FK) and amount.  Calculating the balance is of course as easy as  SELECT SUM(payments.AMOUNT) FROM payments WHERE ID = [account] SELECT SUM(orders.AMOUNT) FROM orders WHERE ID = [account]   Followed by some simple addition/subtraction math:  UPDATE accounts SET BALANCE = [balance] WHERE ID = [account]   All good - the problem is - how do I maintain this over let's assume years of activity and many, many transactions?  Currently the accounts table is updated every single time a transaction is made, meaning the above three statements run every time. There is of course an index on the ID column in all three tables, and everything is fast and neat for now, but I work with less than 100,000 transactions, meaning everything fits into the RAM and basically all I throw at the database gets executed immediately. Over time this will change, of course - so how do I handle this?  Is it better to mark the accounts as "dirty" and process balancing in a batch job later, or can I keep updating the balance real-time even when I reach the point where the orders and payments tables will not fit into the RAM?  Do I need to segment the orders and payments and "lock" everything before a given time, such as before last calculation? (I would rather not). I ask because then I could do a SUM WHERE DATE > [last lock timestamp] and update with UPDATE BALANCE = [balance] + [value for last lock] and prevent the problem from outgrowing resources.  I don't need a running balance for each transaction. That's all I can find results for when I try to research this problem. I just care about the total amount paid, the total amount ordered and the balance of accounts.  Why don't I calculate on the fly when I need the balance, you ask? Because one must be able to query the system and ask "Which of my (let's say) 50.000 accounts have a balance below 0?" - something we cannot do easily if we do not store the balance with every account. Reclassifying raster layer with certain colors for value ranges in QGIS? I'm using QGIS. I want a raster layer with 6 different colors each color representing a certain value range (e.g. -1 to 0 red, 0 to 0.2 orange).  In the layer style menu I can only approximate colors. Hilbert, Gödel, and "God equations" - a 19th century lesson for 21st century physicists? It seems there are a lot of respected physicists appearing on pop-sci programs (discovery channel, science channel, etc.) these days spreading the gospel of   Three examples, quickly: 1) Many programs feature Michio Kaku saying that he is on a quest to find an equation, "perhaps just one inch long," which will "describe the whole universe."  2) Max Tegmark has come out with  in which he expresses the gut feeling that "nothing is off-limits" to science.  The subtitle of this book is My Quest for the Ultimate Nature of Reality.  3) In the series  there is talk about a search for the "God equation."  (A good counter-example would be Feynman, but his self-described "non-axiomatic" or "Babylonian" approach does not seem popular with physicists today.)  Is there any sense among physicists that it might be impossible to articulate the "ultimate nature of reality" in equations and formal logic?  It seems to me that physicists are following in the footsteps of the 19th century mathematicians (led by Hilbert) who were on a similar quest which was put to rest by Gödel's incompleteness theorems in 1931.  Is there any appreciation for how the Incompleteness Theorems might apply to physics?  Has any progress been made on  for the 20th century?  Shouldn't this be addressed before getting all worked up about a "God equation?" Derivation of $E=pc$ for a massless particle? In classical mechanics, massless particles don't exist because for $m=0$, $p=0$.  The relativistic relation between energy, mass and spatial momentum is: $E^2= (pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2$ . So it is said that setting $m=0$ in the first equation you get $E=pc$.  How could setting $m=0$ in that equation give you $E=pc$ whilst $p$ appears in the equation and we know $p=γmu$? If you set $m=0$ you will have indeterminacy due to "$γm$". It seems to me like we are doing a "trick" in order to get the $E=pc$. Perhaps there is another proof for this relation? Can you triple-boot safely? Use of 100K ohm resistor along with 0.1uF capacitor? In the circuit diagram below, why is there a 100K&Omega; resistor (NOT R2) connected to the capacitor? To my understanding the capacitor-resistor act as a high pass filter to block the DC offset of the microphone, but since only the capacitor blocks DC why is the 100k resistor used? According to the author of the video (link below) he said, the 100k is used "not to overload the microphone's un-amplified output". I don't get this part.  Also, can only a capacitor be used in this circuit or any other circuit without the 100k resistor?